new odessa, 1882-1887: united we stand, divided we fall

107
Portland State University Portland State University PDXScholar PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 10-1-1975 New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall we fall Helen E. Blumenthal Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Jewish Studies Commons, Political History Commons, and the Social History Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Blumenthal, Helen E., "New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall" (1975). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 2288. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.2285 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Upload: others

Post on 05-Jun-2022

1 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

Portland State University Portland State University

PDXScholar PDXScholar

Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses

10-1-1975

New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided

we fall we fall

Helen E. Blumenthal Portland State University

Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds

Part of the Jewish Studies Commons, Political History Commons, and the Social History Commons

Let us know how access to this document benefits you.

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Blumenthal, Helen E., "New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall" (1975). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 2288. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.2285

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Page 2: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

' .•..I ..

19 7 i~ 0

\ .": ... · ~. !~.' F ... ..., .. .. .. ;

Page 3: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

This thesis is a study start:!.ng w1th trie background

of Russian Jewry, the social climate in the United States

and particularly Oregon which allowed for the development

of communes, the story of New Odessa, and the 1~easons for

its disappearance.

New Odessa was unique in Oregon aa it was a Marxist

commune founded by Russian Jews. The portion of the ther.is

on New Odessa was based on original research: the studying

of p.sriodtcals of the time, original documents, and field

research in the geographical location.

The more accepted and prcductive New Odessa became,

the faster the disintegration. 'I'he geographlcal and cul­

tural isolation of Oregon proved to be too great for the

members of the community, most of whom had been students

and urban residents in Russia. A difference in ideology

between the two leaders resulted in a gradual decline in

membership. By 1887, the community had been declared

bankrupt.

Page 4: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

NEW ODE~jS.f;.j 1.882-1887

UNITED WE S'l1AND - DIVIDED WE FALL

by

HELEN E. BLUMENTHAL

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirer:ents for the de;;r.:e of

MASTER OF ARTS in

HISTORY

Portland StHt~ University 197~)

Page 5: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

L/

l~lf .... , .. r ") "_) • · •'. .\. i..1 '·· .J •J

Page 6: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAP11ER

I

II

III

IV

v

IU'rRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . RUSSIAN JEWRY - LAST HALF OF THE 19TH CEN'I1URY • • • • • • • • • • • •

AMERICAN UTOPIAN SOCIETIES • • • 0 I!# • •

NEW ODESSA "UNITED WE S'rAND -DIVIDED WE FALL" . • . • . . . SUCCESS OR FAILURE . . . . . . . . . . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . APPENDIX . . • • • • • • • 0 • • • • .,1 • •

PAGE

111

l

8

30

l~ 2

73

85

92

Page 7: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

ACKNOWLEDGMEN:rs

Going back to college after twenty-eight years was a

difficult thing to do, but it was something I had always

wanted and after a few summer classes, I enrolled full

time. The pressures of daily living in rorm of family~

home, and community commitments continued on but added to

them were the conjugation of Hebrew verbs and the number

of coup d'etat in the Arab world.

If I wanted it badly enough, the only way to do it

was to get on with it. But, I needed t:t>emendous doses of

encouragement. My family always thought of my going back

to school as another one of "Mother's C:rusades," but thP.y

offered me unders-canding and compassion. My husband whom

I helped through Dental School many years ago, encouraged

me to accomplish that which I had set out to do. To all

my family, including my first grandson who waited to be

born until I had at least finished my B.A., I offer my

grateful appreciation.

My professors made me feel comfortable and were of

utmost compassion. Even the younger students offered en­

couragement. To the members of' my conuni ttee I owe a special

note of thanks. Dcors were opened r~r me and while I knew

time could r;ot go backwards, I often ·tJondered what my J.ti'e

Page 8: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

would have been like if I had had tho advantage of a eel-

lege education.

To Dr. Basil Dymytryshyn a special thanks for the

time he spent giving me a better understanding of Russian

history. To Dr. Michael Passi who opened the door on

Social History for me. He was my connection to the younger

generation and seeing him with the younger students and how

he instilled the idea of making them think, gives me hope

for the future. Rabbi Joshua. Stampfer proved to be a man

of exceptional patience in helping a non-linguist with the

study of Hebrew.

None of this would have been possible without the

help and understanding of Dr. Frederick Cox. His enthu-

siasm, concern, and interest saw me ever many a rough spot.

His desire to see me succeed made me feel I could and

would do it.

At a very low period, I received two grants, one

from the Oregon Historical Society and 0 .-,o ··~

from the Endow-·

ment Committee of the Jewish Welfare Federation. These

grants enabled me to do research in Roseburg but more im-

portant, they gave me the feeling that I was doing an

academically acceptable piece or research. I appreciate

their faith in me.

How does one thank the many people who have helped in

known and unknown ways? The clerk at the Douglas County

Courthouse who helped me search in a dusty basement for old

Page 9: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

v

records. The young man at the Douglas County 'I'itle Company

beca..'Jle so :tnterested in what I wa5 doing that he spent his

own time going over survey and tltle records with me. Mr.

George Abdill of the Douglas County Museum let me spend

time going through his files. To all these, I 0ffer my

appreciation and gratitude.

Mr. and Mrs. Olger Sether have become f~iends of

mine. Mr. Sether's family owned the land on which New

Odessa had been located. He had recently been 111, but he

consented to talk with me and gave me a feel for rural

pioneer Oregon.

Unknowingly, my brother and sisters are also respon­

sible fol" me going back to school. There had always been

great slbling rivalry between us and I was the only one

without an academic degree. I thank them for throwing down

an invisible gauntlet.

It's taken a long time from having been a pre-med

student in the days before wom~n's liberation to f1nally

fin:!.sh a.s a History Maj or. I offer· my deepest thanks to

family, professors, and friends who helped me to achieve

a belief in myself.

Page 10: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The American historian has many we.;ys in which to

approach the recording of the American experience. '11.radi­

tionally, school children have been told of the heroic

deeds of the Founding Fathers, not understanding that this

was the story of a few members of an elitist class and not

a history of the American people.

In recent years, the disciplina of Social Histo~y

has begun to examine the vast entity of the Americans only

to realize that it 1s far from boing a unified society but

rather a pluralistic one that has evolved from all the vast

segments of the people that have gone into the making of

the Ar.ierican people. Each group of immigrants that Cc:t.'ne

brought with it :tts culture and historical and ;:~ocial val­

ues,, a sense of identity that did not disappear when it

became part of the American heritage.

The era of greatest immigration beg:1.nn1ng in the

later half of the 19th century brought with it increasingly

varied groups. The social historian by putting hia empha­

sis on the study of these d1sti.nct1\re characteristics, has

put new focus on the vast ma,jority of' the American people,

Page 11: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

bringing to the study of American history a new dimension

and interpretation.

Every corner of this vast country has had its own

unique experiences, and it is the combination of all these

characteristics that have formed the personality of the

American people. The study of the Pilgrims and the Puri­

tans, the Quakers, the Irish, the Blacks, the Jews has

really just begun. In add.1.tion, along the many highways

and byways, hidden away in forests and lost on vast tracts

of prairie lands, are stories yet to be told and verified

historically of individuals who also contributed to the

Amei"ican story by vir·tue or the fa<!t that they existed

at all.

This thesis is the story of' ()ne such group, hidden

awa.y deep within the forests of Southern Oregon near the

present town of Roseburg.

To find the site of New Odessaj one follows Inter­

state 5 almost straight south from the city of Portland,

Oregon. In the manner of all modern super highways, I-5

skirts the centers of population, well banked and curved

2

to aid the driver in reaching his destination with the

least amount of exposure to r~ll that surrounds hirn. From

Portland, which has the largest population in the state, to

Salem which ranks second, and then on to Eugene it is pos­

sible to drive without a stop, never looking beyond the

side of the road. I-5 may be the lifeline of the state,

Page 12: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

but by its sterility and utilitarianism and identity with

all superhighways in whatever state they may be, it by­

passes those very communities which helped give the Oregon

territory a significance and uniqi.J.eness in the settling of

the United States.

3

The motorist who is aware of the history of the area

finds familiarity in the cutoff signs marked Aurora and

Champoeg and Oregon City. The valley of the Willamette

river gives way to the valley of the Umpqua and the valley

of the Umpqua gives way in turn to the valley of the

Deschutes. The farther south one goes, the more the exit

signs read like a history book of the Oregon territory;

Elkton, Wolf Creek, Oakland, Canyonville and then Roseburg,

the seat of historical Douglas County. There is signifi­

cance behind each name and each community has its place in

history.

Thirty miles south of Roseburg the road winds its

way th1"ough a mountain pass, the same route that the set­

tlers of the urea took when there was no road, only a

trail for the dusty wagons and sore feet. The big heavily

loaded log trucl;:s struggled up the grade, where once

horses and oxen gasped for a breath of cool air coming

from the coast not too many miles awa:y on the other side of

the low coast mountains.

Page 13: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

4

The exit sign marked Glendale suddenly appeared. Not

Utopia or New Odessa or even Julia, 1 its original name, but

Glendale. There, a sign pointing straight ahead, directly

into the foothills) reads "Glendale - 7 miles. 11 It is just

a few miles north of the Josephine county line, but lies

within present Douglas county.

The countryside is still rather desolate. There is

little traffic, there are a few houses, there are no build-

ings on either side of the narrow road. The sign "Tunnel

Road - left" appeared, and then the town of Glendale.

~1ere was a main street a few blocks long with only one

store open, a schoolhouse, and a deserted railroad station.

The tracks outside the station were in good repair and

obviously still in use. There was the ever present logging

mill, for this is timber country, with stacks of dry logs

being watered down because of the dry weathez• and high fire

danger.

Turning left on Tunnel road, there were a few small

houses. One or two side roads branch off of Tunnel Road.

At the end of' the pavement, a narrow dirt road continued

into a heavily wooded area, w!1ere it div1ded and beca.11e

more of a path. On a slight ri3e there was a clear:lng ai~d

below 1 a railroao. tunnel. Tuni:1el 8 near Cow Creek \)n the

1 ~The town presently called Glendale was originally

called Julia after the wife of an early settler.

Page 14: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

railroad line to Medford is still being used by the lu.rnber

companies. Underneath some bru8h wer•e barely visible

~emains of a frame building. A.l"I .J..J. that was left were some

wooden markings along the perimeter but a few nails found

on the site place it in the time period of the 1880's.

5

From survey records, the site of New Odessa, was located on

this property. A colony of young Jewish intellectuals who

had taken a hard and lengthy route from Odessa, a seacoast

city in southern Russia, arrived in August of 1881 by rail,

by ship, by wagon, and by foot. They came to this corner

of southwest Oregon with no money but with high ideals to

start a Marxist commune which was to last from 1882-1887.

Tunnel 8 had been bu:J.lt by Chinese workeI's on property

belonging to the settlers and leased to the railroads, but

the wood for the ties and the fuel for the engines was

later supplied by the Jewish colonists.

Why did these particular people come to this particu-

la1" spot from a foreign country? What were tti~y looking

for in this alien land, surrounded by people who did not

look like them or talk like them or think like them and yet

accepted and helped them in the manner of the frontier?

There is a push-pull the01"'y in the hlstory of immi-

gration that states that not or.ly must the conditions of

tr1e native country be inhospitable to the individuals but

that there must be a host country able to provide the

Page 15: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

6

conditions which are more sa.ti'.3 factory and allow i,h~ indi·­

vidual greater opportt~nities materiali3tically, physically,

and spiritually.

Russia in the last quarter of the 19th century was

the seat of virulent anti-semitism. Life for the Jews was

harsh and many of them sought to leave or to find other

solutions to their problems. America in the same century

was the scene of great expansion:l.sm, conducive to Utopian

colonization which flourished here more readily than !.n any

other country of the time.

These two forces met head on. One result was the

establishment of New Odessa. To understand the philosophy

behind the colony, it is necessary to look at the forces at

work among 19th century Russian Jews; at the United States

during the same period of time which allowed for experi­

mentation with Utopian societies; at the actual colony of

New Odessa; and into the reasons which caused its dis­

appearance.

In terms of United States history or even the history

of the Pacific Northwest or Oregon or Douglas County, New

Odessa lasted just a short moment in time, but it was a

unique story that added one more piece to that kaleidoscope

which is the American people.

This is the history or the ninety or so people who

were at one time members of the New Odessa commune. It is

Page 16: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

also the story of the Oregon territory whi.ch allowed them

to exist culturally and physically, to work and love and

dance, and then disappear into the American landscape.

7

Page 17: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

CHAPTER II

RUSSIAN JEWRY - LAST HALF OF THE 19TH CENTURY

The laws of Russia make a residence in that country for the Jews pr~lor.ged agony, a life in death, a death in life.

One of the significant ingPcd:ients of Russian oiv:tli.-

zation from the days of the tsars to the days of the· USSR

has been the great m.L'11ber of national mino1•ities within

Russian society. The Jews have always b~en a minority

within the other minorities. In Poland, they lived among

the PolF.?s, in Lithuania among the Litlrnanians, in Estonia

arnong the Estonians. Even though minority groups have

always suffered discrimination within Russia, the Jews were

signalled out even further because among the minorities

they were the only ones without a territorial designation,

they spoke a different and distinguishing dialect, they

differed in their religious beliefs, and they often prac-

ticed occupations which differed from that of the general

population.

On August 16, 1772, Catherine II issued the f1rst of

m8JlY decrees which established a discriminatory Jewish

policy to be followed by the tsarist rulers until their

lFrom a speech by Congressman Samuel S. Cox, New Yorks May 21.i. 1880, printed .tn the Congr~ssional R~cord 13, App., p. 651.

Page 18: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

overthrow in 1917. Catherine's decrees were t:he result of

the first partltion of' Poland in 1772, in which Russia

inherited 200, 000 Jews. The subsequent part ii.; ions in 1793

and 1795; adding the additional Polish-Lithuanian prov­

inces, brought the nmnber· of Jews to 900, 000 •1 For the

9

first time the distinction was made between Jewish and mm-

Jewish subjects. The non-JewB were promised a continuation

of the rights enjoyed u.nder the former government through-

out the Russian empire. The area in which J·e·ws could claim

former privileges was specifically limited to the terI':ttory

in which they were living at th~ time of part1t1on. 2

The year of this decree, 1772,, is regarded by scme

historians as the yeal" of the official establishr.ient of the

Pal~: the area in which Jews were confi.ned to settlement.

Other historians date the Pale from 1791~ because the offi-

cial decree was issued that year. The Russian scholar

A. D. Gradovsky dates the Pale from 1769 when foreign Jews

were permitted to immigrate into Russia on the condit:ton

that they settle only in the New Russian provinces.3

1s.tmon M. Dubnow, H:tstorv of the Jews in Russia and Poland ( Phtladelphia: J·ewish Publicatlon-Sociefy-; 1916) , p. 30·1.

2Lou1s Greenberg, The Jews in Russia, 1 (New Haven: Yale Un:.tver.sit.y Press, 191flf),P:-T"as- translated from the Russi.an.

3rbid., p. 9.

Page 19: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

10

By 1804, the Pale of Settlement was clearly defined.

It consisted of the Lithuanian provinces of Vilno, Grodno,

and Minsk; Vohlyn and Podolie in the southwest; V:itebsk and

Mogilev in White Russia. excluding the villages; Chern.1.gov'

a.nd Polta•;a minus the crown ha.inlets in Little Russia

(Ukraine); Kherson, Ekaterinoslav, Taurida, and Bessarabia

minus Nikolaev and Sevastopol in New Russia; the province

of Kiev minus the capitol; and the Baltic provinces,

present day Latvia and Estonia for old settlers only.

Rural settlements in the 50 verst (1 verst equals o.6629

mile) along the western frontier were to be closed to new-

comers on the grounds that along the bcrdern, they might

engage in smuggling. 1

Within the Pale, Jews we.Pe constantly on the move,

for even with the restrictions placed on them, their num~·

bers grew as did the entire population of Europe in the

19th century. By 1880, the Jewish population in Russia had

grown to four million fr'om one million in 1810 despite the

fact that by the later quarter of the 19th century, ever

one third of the .Tews of Eastern Europe emigrated from ? Russia.·-

In a decree issued August 26, 1827 Jews were made

liable for military se1"vlce and could be called up anytime

1 a1"eenberg 1 Th£_ .. Je!.f~___!_fLJ\u.ss:ta, 13 p. 11.

2Moses RJ.schin, ~~Promised _Q_ity (New York: Harper •rox-chbovks, 1970), PP~ 2Li-33o

Page 20: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

11

between ages 12 and 25. Whereas the proportion of' Jewish

recruits was 10 per 1000, among the general population it

was 7 per 1000.

In 1835 the Pale of Settlement was redefined, 15

provinces in the wes1; and south a number of districts

excepted. Temporary permits were issued for othe~ parts of

Russia. Only certain Jews among the merchant class were

permitted to visit the capitols, seaports, and the fairs of

Nizhnil, Novogorod, and Kharkov. Jews were forbidden to

employ Christians as servants. The Russian language,

Polish, or German could be used for business but under no

circumstances the Hebrew language. 1

Jewish schools were set up by the government on

November 13, 1844. The Kahal (local Jewish government) was

abolished on December 19 of the same year and brought the

Jews under the same system of local government as the rest

of the population. The tax on kosher meat which had been

used by the kahal, was transferred to the provisional

authorities. 2

When Alexander II became tsar in 1856, the ~Tewz

hoped that some of the discrin1inatcry laws or the 18th and

early 19th centuries would be rescinded. Alexander II had

lHugh Seton-Watzon, The Russian Emph:tl 1801-1917 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967f, pp-: 273-74,

2 Ibid • , p • 27 4 •

Page 21: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

instituted new reforms abolishing serfdom, granting of

local government, and court and militaroy reforms. For

these reforms he gained the title "'l1sar Liberator. 11 The

cantcnist sys tern which was vir·tuall:y life service in the

milj.tary was abolished August 26, 1856, the day that

Alexander II was crowned. 1

The Haskalah (enlightenment) movement among Jews

which had begun in the early part of the 19th century,

received new encouragement. The atmosphere of hope that

prevailed was welcomed by those Jews who felt that by re-

12

ceiv:1.ng a secular educat:lon and civic ema.ncipation, the

question of anti-semitisn would be solved.

The bomb that killed Alexander II ended an era that

might have seen a different social structure for the Rus-

sian people. The new tsar, Alexander IIIs had not been

trained to leadership and had been given a limited educa-

tion. He was described as "lacking !n mental keeness.li He

was su.re of his own imperial destiny and regarded himself

as appointed by God~ By natur·e, he wa.s against democratic

1During the reign of Nicholas I, Jews were first inducted into the military serv.1.ce. "The Statute of Con­scription and N:tlitary Service of J\U,£:~1st 26, 1827" provided that in adcition to supplying racru1t~i for the army for twenty-five years, Jews had to provide military conscripts f1"om ages 12-25 > these juvenile conscripts were called "cantonists. 11

Page 22: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

13

institutions and the death of his father at the hands of

l t 1 i .. th d - i t ti b . i ~ l revo u onar es s~reng one n s au ocra c eL e.s.

The reign of Alexander III W&$ one of militant reac-

tion. For Jews, it brought a reign of terror. Prior to

his rule there had been only sporadic pogroms (anti-Jewish

riots), all of which had occurred at Odessa, one in 1820,

another· in 1859, and the third in 1871. 2 Dur·ing the reign

of Alexander III, the pogrom became a regularly occurring

event until the fall of the monarchy in 1917. The attacks

upon Jews, although not dil'·ectly ordered by the central

government, were tolerated by it. The common pattern they

followed shows that they were not spontaneous but planned

and organized by some higher body. 3 The rioting usually

took place for several days before the government would

take the necessary action to stop them.

On April 15, 1881 in Kirovo (Elisa\Tetgrad) less than

a month after the assassi.nation of Alexande1~ II, a pogrom

took place which was allegedly organized by a gang sent for

this very purpose. When a drunken Russian was thrown out

of a Jewish owned inn, a mob that had been waiting nearby

raised the cry that the Jews were beating Russians and

they began attacking Jewish pedestrians. At this signal,

1Louis Greenberg, The Jews in Russia, 2 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1951), Y• 1.

;:> ..... b.i;d - J. ... • ' p. 19.

3rbid.

Page 23: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

Jewish Dtores were smashed and looted. The riots were

checked that night by the police, t;Jt the nei:t day they

were resumed with increased vigor ar~d '.<.'ith the police

remaining neutral. 1

In quick succession pogroms followed in Kiev (Sunday,

Apz•il 26, 1881), Odessa (May 3-5) and spread throughout the

country. The government waited several days until it

offered protection to the victims on the theory that the

anti-Jewish campaigns had been organized by revolutionary

agitators. The Tsar stated "that in the Cl"'iminal disorders

in the sou·th of Russia the Jews merely served as a pretext

and that it is the work of anarchists. 112 In a statement

issued· after a pogrom at Pereyaslav on June 30-July 1,

1881, the Jews were condemned because Christian blood wa.s

spilt.

The pogroms were used as a pretext to further limit

the economic and civil status of the Jews. Provisional

committees were organized by the government to review the

Jewish problem, with Jews being allowed to participate in

these committees which varied from 10-60 members. In

practices however·' the number of Jews serving on these com-

rnittees was very small for no cow.mittee except that of

Kovno had mo1"e than two Jewish delegates. While the mayors

"')

'Dubnow. Jews in Russia and Poland, p. 261. - -----... ··----·----------

Page 24: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

of the chief' cities were invit~d to sit on the committees,

the mayor of Zhitomir was not in~lu6cd because his views

differed fro~ that cf the authori~ies. 1 As a result of

these practices, the Jewish point of view had little

effect.

The Central co1mnittee of the government assigned to

Jewish affai.rs recommended the complete revision of legls-

lation concerning the Jews. In order to calm the allegedly

aroused population, tempoi•ary measures were adopted. On

M~v 3, 1882 the government adopted the following Temporary

Rules often called the May Laws:

l. Non new Jewish settlers wei•e allowed in the villages or hamlets of the Pale.

2. Jews could not own or manage real estate or farms outside the ~1t1es of the Pale.

3. Jews were not allowed to do business on Sundays or other Christian holidays.

These Temporary Rules remained in effect until the Revolu­

tion of 1917. 2

Tne effect of these laws was that many Jews found

themselves homeless. For example, a Jewlsh v:tllag~r re-

turning from a trip would be declared a new settler and

forever barred from hi.s home. Rural residents, who went to

the big cities to worship in the synagogues, were forced to

prove legal residence before they could return home.

lareenberg, The Jews 1n Russia, 2, p. 26.

2Ib id. , p ~ 30.

Page 25: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

Moving from cme house to ~.not.her i:i the same village re­

sulted in loss of residence rights. 1

16

Jewish employment opportuntties becc-..me limited. They

could not be employed, with rare exceptions> in any depart-

ment of government servic~s. The doors of educational

institutions within the Pale remained closed to the vast

majority. An official limitation of students in secondary

schools began on July l, 1887 and on July 10 it was ex­

tended to the universities. The admission of Jewtsh stu-

dents to the schools wan dependent on the number of non-

Jewish students even in the areas populated predominately

with Jews. In the secondary schools the chances of admis-

sion were even sl1.mmer as a great portion of non-Jewish

parents did not believt:: in giving their children a sec-

ondary education, lessening the educational opportunities 2 for Jews.

These laws we1,e binding on the fifteen Russian prov~

inces in the Fale of Settlement~ but not in the Kingdom of

Poland. 'I1he laws ware inte1•preted with 1ncreas i.ng severity

and by the end of the 19th century, Jews in Russia had to

f n,ce the reality that their old way of life was being mod:t-

fied by Russian. law. The: Jews of Russia were forced to

lareenberg, The Jews in Russia, 2, p. 31.

2Ib1d., pp, 33-37.

Page 26: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

1·7

change, but the question of su;"irival was paramount. The

problem brought different responses from vari.ous Jewish

communities.

At first the J'~ws resorted to traditional ways of

prayer and fasting. Public .fast days were held and special

services given in the synagogues. In Odessa, a city not

considered especially orthodox, when the cantor at a spe-

cial service gave the prayer

'All the nations reside on their land but Israel wanders the earth like a shadow finding no rest, receiving no brotherly welcome,' the sobb.1.ng of the men and women in the synagogue was heart rending.l

After it became obvious 'chat the life of the Jews was

impossible under the existing conditions, the Jewish com-

munity turned within itself to find alternate 1301.utj.ons for

survival. Even though there was a widespread belief that

Tsarist Russia was determined to rid itself of the Jews,

none of the various government commissions and cornrnittees

set up to deal with the Jewish question ever proposed

e:tpulsion 01 .. emigration as a possible solution. The state-

ments made by high ranking officials expressing the wish

that the country might be freed of Jews were never trans-

lated into official policy or legislation. The mass

Page 27: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

exodus of Jews across the western ~orders of Russia from

1880-1914 was in response to the pleas and initiatives of

the Jews themselves. 1

18

Gradually four plans began to evolve: one, assim1la-

tion aud acceptance of Christian1.ty; two, revolutionary

change, not just among the Jews, but as a part of modifying

the structure of the existing Russian government; three,

seculai-•1zat:l.on of Jewish society (Haskalah); four, emigra-

tion primarily to Palestine (political Zionism) or to the

United States.

'11he fourth solution, emigration, is the plan which

the Jews who founded New Odessa adopted combined with a.

zeal of revolutionary ldealism. 'l'his idealism) however,

was not intended to apply to Oregon society in general but

only to the Jewish i.mmigrants. They had no desire to

change the whole of society but only their epecific group.

'.!'he Or~gon group believed the United States was large

enough for them to isolate themselves and organize the:tr

own social structure.

To understand the motivation of the Ne1'1 Odessa emi-

grants, the other alternatives to survival must also be

understood.

lttans Rogger, 11 Tsartst Policy on Je\dsh Emigration·' 11

Soviet Jewish Af::~t:t.~-~' Vol. 3, No. 1, 1973, p. 26.

Page 28: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

19

Assimilation is rather salf-e~planatory. The govern-

ment had consistently maintained tha~ they were against the

Jews only because they were not Christians. Therefore, if

the Jews lost their identity as a religion it should follow

that there would no longer be a Jewish problem. In prac-

tice "of all the religious and racial minorities in Russia,

the Jews were the only ones whose merger with the Russians

was a prerequisite for civil equality."1 Jews may have

changed their religion but their nationality was consider~d

to be Jewish and so in reality they could not be assimi-

lated legally.

Among the Jewish intelligentsia, the.t•e was a strong

strain of Russian nationalism. The generation of Jews

living in the mid-nineteenth century became interested in

the socialist and nationalist movements. These were the

parents cf the students of the late 19th century. As a

result, the young people had grown up in an atmosphere and

a home life that was conducive to interest and discuasio11

of these movements. After the outbreak cf the pogroms :tn

1881, they saw that self-defern:a:: was a matter of personal

survival. Their retu1~n to J11daism was ppompted more as a

national rather than a religious sentiment. These were the

young people who bt.~c&me intcres ted in Ha::skalah which

Page 29: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

20

stressed secular rather than religious ed~cation. 1 It is

impossible to determine the number of Jei·m that success-

fully converted as even today in the USSR, Jews are classi-

fied as a nationality as well as a religion.

Among the early revolutionaries there were surpt•is-

ingl.y few Jews. The secret anti-government activism whif,;h

had begun during the relgn of Alexander II came about by

the refusal of the Tsar to grant a constitutional regime~

and his failure to solve t:i1e land needs of the peasantry.

Among all the heterogeneous groups within Russia, the Jews

were most loyal to the ,government of Alexander II because

of the minor reforms he instituted to help their economic

and legal status and his abolition of the cruel ant1-

semi tic laws of Ni.chula::J II. 2

Few Jews were active in the early revolutionary move-

ments. Within the Pale, there was a tradition of absti-

nence from political affairs and of obedience to author•ity.

The first socia15.!i:it activity among Jews was the:i.r ir..volve-

ment in the Narodnik (Agraria~ Pcpulint) movement, begun by

young intellectuals who would attempt to demonstrate kin-

ship and work side by side with the peasants in the fields.

The idea of the mir --' the 19th century attempt at Russian

la . reenoerg, The Jews in RussJ-a;; 2, p. 161.

2Greenberg, 'I'he ,Tews in Russ;ia, 1, p. l lf 6.

Page 30: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

21

communal living became the ideal for the young Russian

revolutionary, non-Jew as well as Jew. The agrarian popu-

lation was narrowly nativist and outbreaks of anti-semitism l among the peasants frequently occu1 .. red.

With the growth of a Jewish student body in the

1870's there was increased contact between the Jewish and

Russian intelligentsia. The students were concerned ~s

Russians with the plight of the Russian people and not as

Jews interested in Jewish rights. They maintained that the

emancipation of the Jew would take place with the emancipa-

tion of the masses. Paul Akselrod, an eminent revolution-

a:ry who happened to be Jewish, dedicated himself to the 2 redemption of the poor and humble people of Russia.

By th~ early 70's, Jews were participating in every

phase of revolutionary activities. They took seriously the

slogan of the revolution "Go to the people!".3 They left

homes and car~ers to live and work among the people.

The nurr.ber of earl:Y Jewish terrorists was small.

Aron Gobet of Vilno was the first Jew to be executed for

his act;ivities. He died in 1879 when his plot to assassi-

nate Alexand~r II was discovered. Women students were

lHoward M. Sacharj The CourRe of Modern Jewish His to...t.>: ( Clevel~nd: World Press, -1958T, pp-. 28Y:Slr:-

2 Greenberg, The Jews in Russia, lJ p. 148.

Page 31: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

22

among the most active revolutionar•ies. A Jewish woman;

Bessie Helfman, received a sentence to hard labor and died

in the for-tress of Petropavlovsk in Kamchatka. 1

Jews worked in the organizational phases of revolu-

tionary activities. They also served as intermedlari.cs

between Russian and Western s"cialism as many Jewish stu-

dents being denied a university education in Russia, went

to schools in Germany and Switzerland, where they made con-·

tact with other student revolutionaries. Intellectually

emancipated, these Jewish youths emerged among the leader­

ship in the revolutionary movements in Russia in the two

decades before World War I. 2

Unfortunately, the Jewish revolutionaries whose aim

was to solve the Jewish problem, complicated the situation

by giving the government a specific group on which to focus

its anti-revolutionary hatreds and activities.

It became obvious that Jewish Russification did not

provide zocial a~d civil equality for the Jews. With an

increase in anti-Jewish activities, there was a definite

trend towards the belief that only by emigration could the

Jew hope to survive. ,Jewish leadership was divided on

whether or not to support mass emigraticn. The upper Jew~

ish bourgeoise was afraid that any attempt to organize or

lareenberg, The Jews in Rm:;1:31a, 1, p. 151. _______ , ... -~--

2Riscl11n, ~rEmised C~tz, p. 42.

Page 32: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

23

encourage emigration would be considered unpatriotic. The

majority felt that mass exodus would only increase the

pogroms and undermine the struggle for emancipation. There

was, however, a growing minority that did favor leaving

Russia, including Dl'. Max Mandels trom of Kie1t, who wrote:

Either we get civil rights or we emigrate. Our human dignity is being trampled on, our wives and daughters are being dishonored, we are looted and pillaged. Either we get decent human righ~s or else let us go where our eyes may lead us.~

Without any specific Jewish or government pressure,

after the pogroms of 1881, a spontaneous emigration began

to take place. Thousands of Jews fled over the borders

without funds or passports) and were often stranded in

European cities, or formed large Jewish communities in

border towns such as Brody on the Austrian border. 2

As the Jewish people began to organize and collect

pennies to aid 1n mass migrations, two countries emerged as

the centers of refuge) Palestine, then under Ottoman con-

trol, and the United States. The United States because of

economic opportunities and vast underdeveloped areas;

Palestine because of the nationalistic feelings developing

through the newly organized Zionist movement and its his-

torical and religious significance.

lareenberg, The Jews 1n Russia, 2, p. 62.

2The name Brody has become part of the Yiddish language, synonymous vd.th legal red tape.

Page 33: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

24

The question then follows~ dof.;s .Tudaism and the Jew-

ish way of life have a chance of s urv.t ~.ral in any land

other than that associated with nationalistic aspirations

or historical memories?

The Zionists believed that the histor·y of Europe had

shown the spread of anti-semitism from one country to

another, across the continent from Spain in the 15th cen-

tury as far as Russia. Would Jews ever be safe in a land

which was not a Jewish homeland? The political Zionists

believed not.

The Zionist movement attracted leaders who had tried

other courses of action only to find they were not effec-

tive in solving the Jewish problem. Moses Leb Lilienblu.m

who had in his earlier years followed Haskalah, advanced

a1~guments which have become classic in Zionist ideology.

He believed that all emig1•ation efforts should be directed

towa1"ds Palestine because "we need a corner of our own, we

need Palestine, we need a real centre there ••• we need

energy and activity. 111

Because of the difficulties imposed against the Jews

by the Turkish government w!1ich controlled Palestine a.s

well as the small absorptive capacity of the country in the

1880's, the actual numbers of those leav:tng for Palestine

was negligiblt?. Organizations such as Hobebe Zion (Lovers --·~---

lareenberg, The Jews in Russi~, 2, p. 68.

Page 34: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

of Zion) were formed in many of' the large cities to train

and organize chalutzJ_.!!l_ ( p:ltmeers) •1

25

The mainstreru-:i of' emigration was directed to·:11ards the

United States, the promised land, where the Jews believed

gold paved the streets and all men had equal opportunities,

where "all men were regarded ae human beings." The number

of Jews emigrating to the United States from Ru.s:sia. in the .,

years 1881-1890 totaled 135,003.'

Among young intellectuals, there were those who

idealized the freedom of the soil. It should be remembered

that according to the Tempo1'ary Rules, no Jews were allowed

to own land outside the cities and the towns. Except for

limited subsistence farming for family consumption or trade

of products within the community, the number of Jews en-

gaged in agriculture was limited. The opinion was held by

some, that if Jews were allowed to engage successfully in

pursuits other than trade or commerce, one of the deep

roots of anti-semitism would disappear. The stigma of

"money lender 11 and "merchant" would no longer be all inclu-

sive and Jews would again become an agricultural people as

in Biblical days.

Arnong th~ eroups desiring to pursue farm1ng, the.re

were those who wanted to go to Palestine and those who felt

loreemberg, The Jews 1n Hussi~, 2, p. 7 8.

2 Ibid., p. 73.

Page 35: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

26

America would be a better choice. Inep:lred by Hobebe Zion 1

a group called BILU from the initials of the Hebrew words

meaning "House of Jacob, let us go," combined Marxist zeal

with Jewish nationalism and in 1882 with a total treasury

of a few hundred rubles, der·arted for Palestine. The

BILUim found labor in the hot desert combined with malaria

more than a challenge to their idealism. Though they

lasted as a group only a short period of time, they were

the forerunners of the First Aliyah (wave of inunigration)

into Palestine which founded the early agricultural

settlements. 1

Paralleling this movement to Palestine was a group

called· Am Ola."ll (eternal people} which had begun f1rst a$ a

self-defense organization in the city of Odessa. The city

of Odessa was the home of many of the early nationalist

movements. In the early 19th century, it had been the city

for the movement towards Greek nationalism. Because of its

geographice.l location on the Black Sea, it was an important

center for trade and commerce. This allowed for contact

and exchange of ideas between peoples who had come from

many countries and brought with them new and developing

:ldeas.

The Jews of Odessa were not particularly l"eligious

and there was no rabbinical college in the city.

lsa.char, The Cou1"se of Modern Jewish Historz, p. 268.

Page 36: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

27

Therefore, they were more open to the· acceptance of new and

different ideas than Jews who lived in a ~ore orthodox

atmosphere.

In 1881, Moshe Herder and Monye Bokal founded the

movement. Initially, after the decision to emigrate was

made, they could not decide wheth~r to go to Palestine or

to the United States but eventually came to settle in

America, establishing cooperative colonies in the spirit of

Robert Owen and Charles Fou1"ier with a touch of Leo

Tolstoy. 1

The primary ideological difference between Am Olam

and BILU was that Am Olam regarded tf:.e Jewish problem as

essentially socio-economic and political and not cultural

and national. The leaders in America remainect the same

Russianized intellectuals t:hey had been in thf~ir former

home.

The name, Am Olai11, and its emblem of a plow and the

Ten Commandm<~nts was ind1cat1 ve of' the movement's character

and pu~pose. The plow symbolized the agricultural pursuits

and the Commandments its Jewish identification and moral

standards. The diary of one of its members expressed their

philosophy

... ~Greenberg, The Je~-~--_1~ Russia, 2, p. 166.

Page 37: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

'Our motto is labor in the fields, and our goal is the physical and spiritual rejuvination of our people. In free America, \·!here people o.f' va:t~iou$ national:tties live in amity, we Jewl? too shall find a corner in which to rest our• heads. We shall prove to the world that we are qualified for physical labor. ,i

28

The leaders of Am Olam who crune frcm the revolut:ion-

a.ry ranks, stressed not only agricultural work, but in-

sisted that colonies in the United States be established O"' ••

Marxist principles, modeled on the Russian mir rather than

on private property. The predominant motive was socialist

with the movement being closer to Russian radicalism and ?

Russian culture than to Judaism.~

New Odessa in Oregon became the goal for a very small

number of Jews who elected to come to A.-ner:Lca, interested

not in settling in the big cities and established Jewish

communities, but in applying prjnciples of socialism to

agricultural pursuits and living style in a hidden corner

of the Pacific Northwest. Numerically, New Odessa was

never very large. At its height it uumbered atout 90 per-

sons. It was small in comparison to t11e va.s t numbers of

Jews coming to the United Stat.es in 'the last quarter of

the 19th century.

1 As t:r•ans lated fx•om the Hussian in Greenberg, 'I'he Jews l.?}_Ru~sia, 2, Pe 166.

2areenberg,, ~·he_Je\'!S in.Russia, 2, p. 167.

Page 38: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

The ideology of New Odesna reached beyond its geo­

graphical borders. When the colony broke up in 1887, ita

membership dispersed throughout the country, and each in

his own way made some alight L~pact on the totality of

what is called American Judaism.

29

Page 39: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

CHAPTER III

AMERICAN UTOPIAN SOCIETIES

The concept of utopian society is not unique to the

present American generation. Ever since man first organiz­

ed attempts to reach fulfillment of humanitarian dreams 1

people have endeavored to establj.sh ideal communities. The

roots of utopian thought go deep into religion, both

eastern and western; into the rational philosophy of

Plato's ~e_Eublic; into Frourier, Saint Simon, and Comte;

into Marxism and other various systems of socialism.

America in the 19th century was a country of great

optimism, firm in the belief of its "manifest destiny."

Vast areas of land had been opened with the Louisiana pur­

chase and the do()r to immigration was wide open. The va.st

areas of uninhabited land offered room for experj_mentation

with alternate living styles. America had been founded on

rel:!.gious utopian ide·als and by the 19th century over 1000

various concepts of ut.:ip:ian communities ha.d been ectab-

11shed. New Odessa was one of these.

The word "utopia 11 is taken from Thomas Moore's worlc

by that. name. It transl.ates literally into the word

"nowhere." '..Phe concept of this definition is that nowhere

on earth is the1 .. e a perfect society. Man's quest for such

Page 40: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

a society led him to dre~n of a heaven on earth. Since

man's dreams are not llinited by what is possible, utopian

societies a1•e planned by the drea."Ilers A

1

Fourier, Owen, and Saint Simon believed that ideal

societies could be created by moral persuas:ton. To .Marx

31

and Engels, the word utopian was a term of derision. Marx-

ist radicals agreed w.ith the earlier utopian thinkers that

a new social order must be created for such societies to

exist. The Marxist believed, however, that the bourgeoise

society must disappear before a "new man" could exist. All

utopian thought was similar in that it was against the

"status quo. 112

A broade1" definition of utopia is given by the soci­

ologist Rosabeth Moss Kanter who has written extensively on

the subject:

The imaginary society in which humankind's deep­est yearnings, noblest dreams, and highest aspira­tions come to fulfillment, where all physical, social~ and spiritual forces work together, in harmony, to permit the attainment of everything people find necessary and desirable.3

Religion is not the only impetus for the utopian

dream. Com .. 111unitarian colonies have been based on

lRon E. Roberts., The New Cormnunes (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1971), p:-e-;---

2 Ibid., p. 9 • .., ..)Rosabeth Moss Kunter, Conm;j.tm.snt and Community

{Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), p. i:--

Page 41: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

32

politico-economic or psychosocial philosophies as well, or

there may be a ccmbination of all tllree. 1 If one accepts

these principles, then it 1s possible to conceive of the

origins of America as being based on principles of Chris­

tian religious utopias. As early as 1680, the Labadiots, a

group of Protestant mysti.cs settled in Northern Maryland.

On the basis of communal land ownership, Plymouth Bay

Colony started as a joint stock company in which all prof­

its and benefits were to be held in conunon for at least

seven years. 2

Not all utopian communities are necessarily communes.

Plato's ideal Republic described an agrarian society. He

placed emphasis on voluntary poverty or asceticism. Small

size was also considered a criteria for Plato's Republic.

Communes share many utopian ideals but they may be imple-

mented in two different ways. The idea of utopia combines

a hope for a better world and a refuge from the complex-

itiea of established scciety. There is a negation and re-

jection of conventional life for which is substituted an

affirmation of a new way. 3

lKanter, Commitp,ent and Community, p. 3.

2John Fiske, Thtl Beg~nniryy;s of Ne!!. Eng1?-f!.<! (Cam­bridge: Houghton Mifflin> lSS-9), pp. 86-100.

3Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Communes - Creating and ~~n-~$ing th1~; _.9ollective Lii'e_ (New York: Harper and Row, 197jJ, p.--if:

Page 42: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

A commune ls a voluntary, value-based, cormnunal

social order.

A commune seeks self determination, often making its own laws and refusing to obey some of the larger laws of the larger society. It is identi­fiable as an entity haviP..g bot,h ph~rsical and BOcial boundaries •••. Its primary end is an existence that matches its ideals •••• These ideals gi vc rise to the key ccmrnunal ai?''angeme::1t, the sharing of resources and finances.

America, was a haven fer nv.merous religious communi-

33

ties in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. The Shaker

community led by Mother Ann Lee of England was founded in

1787. The Hutterian Br•ethren (founded in Germany in 1530

and since 1873 in the United States) has today 150 communi­

ties and 17,000 members. 2

As population moved westward across the plains to the

Pacific coast, new areas of the country were opened for

settlement. The Oregon territory was the site of the

Aurora colony rounded by William Keil. This was basically

a Christian religious commune populated by people of

German descent. Keil emphasized separateness and rejected

the dogmas and hierarchj.es of the established churches. He

found the fronti.er welcomed him with his 11 'no title but

Christian• and 'no rules but the Bible.'"3

lxanter, Cornmitment and Communi t:'[_, p. 2.

2rtid., PP. 3-4.

3rb1d., p. 4.

Page 43: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

The religiotrn communal movement co!1tinued to flourish

in the early part of the 19tl1 century, reaching its heights

in the 1840's. As mobility increased and people moved from

the farm to the town and city in response to increased

industrialization of American society, a small socialist

commune movement began to develop, hoping to bring a bu.man-

izing factor to the dehumanization of the 1nd1vidual

brought about by urban living. Horn.ce Greeley, whost: ideas

influenced many of the utopian experiments of the 18li0 's,

believed "there should be no paupers and no surplus labor

• • • only in unity cc:n a solution be found for the prob-·

lems of labor. 111

The impetus for politico-economic communities had

come originally from abroad, from the thoughts of Robert

OWen in England or from Cha1•les Fou1~1er and Etienne Cabet

in France. '11he ideas may have been foreign but Americans

seemed willing to accept various life styles within their

midst and if they did not accept their doctrines them-

selves, they allowed these movements room in which to

experiment and develop. New Hal'•mony (1825-1827) was based

on OWenite ideas~ Over forty utopian communes based en

Fourier's. doctrines of association were established in the

decade of the 40's. The North American Phalanx (181./3-1856)

lKanter, Com .. 111:1.tment and Community:, p. 5.

Page 44: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

and the Wisconsin Phalanx (1844-1850) We::"e probabl:ir the

best known and most successful. The Icarian oommLmltles

based on Cabet's novel Y~L~~n IQ.!!rie lasted from 1848-

1898.1

John Humphrey Noyes, a radical graduate of Yale

Theological Seminary from Putney, Vermont, attempted to

combine religion, reforr.i, and political idealism in

founding the community of Oneida in New York in 1848. In

the words of the Oneida song:

We have built us a dome On our beautiful plantation~ And we all have one hvmc

2 And one family :relation.

Oneida was based on an eccnom'.1.c communism, cornmtma.l

living, "complex marriage" or free love, communal child

rearing, and government by mutual self criticiam. The

35

community generally maintained a good relationship with its

neighbors. However, there was much controversy over the

sexual practices within the communityj and partly because

of outside pressures and partly from soree within the commu-

nity in terms of personal di.ssatis!'action, the Oneida com-

munity dissol~1ed into the Oneida joint stock company in

1881.3

1Kanter, Commitment and Communit~, pp. 6-7.

2Mark Halloway, Heavens on Eart~ (London: Turnstile Press, 1951), p. 179, as quoted from the Oneida song.

3Kanter,, Comtni tment and Co~l}If~n:U~_.Y.., p. 18.

Page 45: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

36

Some of the ideas which were initiated at On:eida

had an effect on the structure of the corrimun1:~s which fol-

lowed. There was usually a charismatic leader as the in-

stigator. At Oneida, it was John Noyes. While some of the

sexual practices may have been modified J the family s ti-•uc-

ture in most communitarian communities varied from that of

the general societies. The idea of mutual self criticism

took hold and became one of the characteristics identifying

a commune. The division of labor at Oneida was well

organized and all who were physically able "worked." Mem-

bers had only a minimum of private property and the earning

of money for subsistence was a function of the entire com-

muni ty. Oneida rnay not ha~1e been the "Kingdcim of Heaven 0n

Earth" that its founder intended it to be, but it was a

peculiarly American type of commune which became a proto­

type for many that followed. 1

'l'he waves of religious awakenings which occux•red

thl"'ough the 19th century 1.n America, tended to give to

Amerl<~ans the philosophy that this was a land of "new be-

ginnlngs." 'l1he national consciousness was based on the

idea of America as a land of manifest destiny~ destined by

God to be the site of a new and better world.

1Pierrepont .Noyes, My Father's House: _An Onelda. 5ovhood (New York: Farrar and Reinhart, 1937}, no specific pages bnt a first hand account of the Oneida conununity.

Page 46: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

37

The 19th century communes developed basic principles

concerning their organization. As the old ones either dis­

solved or evolved into other forms of social organization,

there developed ce1•tain common characteristics within com­

munal living. These criteria are not only applicable to

the early communes, but persist until today wherever they

may be or whatever they are called. The Bruderhof of Ger­

many, the Shinkyo of Japan, and the Israeli Kibbutztm by

virtue of their being communes have similar characteris­

tics. Variations may certainly occur, but basically the

principles and theories remain the same.

Dr. Rosabeth Moss Kanter of Brandeis University an.d

Harvard Graduate School, has written extensively on the

communal movements. Her book Com.7!1i tment and C~:>nmiuni tl_ ha:~

been invaluable in studying the communal movements of both

today and yesterday. Her criteria of definition as well as

her distinction between successful and unsuccessful com­

munes is the basis for determining the effect of New

Odessa. The following criteria are based on her work in

Commitment and Communit~. 1

Common to all communes is an idealization of communal

life. Primary to th:ts belief is the concept of human per­

fectibility. Societies and not people are the cause of

tensions. In a small isolated environment, small scale

lKanter, Commltm_en.t and Community_, pp. 32-57.

Page 47: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

controlled societies can be org~nized to create the perfect

society and therefore the perfect human being. The reli­

gious communes thought of tht: perfect society as Heaven,

Eastern myst:tcs as higher incarna.tlon, and socialists as

the next step in human evolution. Confession and self

criticism were means of achievtng aelf improvement. Mutual

c11 i tic ism becmne an im!JOrtant pa;>t: of a "pex•fect 11 society.

The utopian community is well organized in contrast

to the disarray of the larger society. The chaos of the

unplanned life style is replaced by a predicted society

which follows a predictable pattern. Planning extends to

all aspects of conununal life--eating, sleeping, praying,

loving,· working--centr•ally coordinated by group leadership.

A third important feature of utopian communal belief

is that of brotherhood. If societies can be brought into

harmony with natural laws, then people can be brought into

harmony with one another. Some of the names of the 19th

century communes included the word "harmony" as part of

thei1, names, for example, "Harmony Society of Harmony,

Pennsylvania 11 and "New Harmony, Indiana." It is from this

concept that the lctea of shared ownership of all property

evolved. Private property was abolished and goods equally

distributed. Work as well as property was shared, in some

communities jobs were rotated with each person assigned

daily or weekly tasks. Finally, the emphasis on brother­

hood and harmony led to f'ocusing relations with:tn the

Page 48: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

39

group so that eating, sle1~p1ng,, and education became ehared

living experiences. All men and women were considered as

brothers and sisters within a single fa.mily unit.

There was a sense of experimentation within the 19th

century communes which is still characterlstlc of communes

today. Many communities tried new forms of dress and

appearance for women such as shorter dresses and hair

styles. The shocking style of the blo•:>rner was first worn

at Oneida and was as outrageous a costume then as the

hippie styles coming out of today's communes. Since a

commune is a small social 3tructure it serves as a social

laboratory in which new ideas ferment a:id develop.

Return to the land is often associated with conuntmal

ideology but not necessary to its structure. Agricultural

pursuits, however, offer the best way to fulfill a number

of utopian ideals. The return to a simple life and an un­

complicated means of livelihood with more tasks that re­

quire unskilled labor and therefore offer work for more

people including children, including the necessity of a

com..rnunal effort in periods such as harvest time, all foster

the feeling of brothe1•hood and family.

"Pcrf'ectibility > order, brotherhood, merging of mind

and body, experimentation, and the uniqueness of community"

were the ideals which ge.ve the communes the:i.r identity.

Page 49: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

40

'l'hcse were the dreamt:. The practical rea.lizationf'J often

forced the changing of these dr•eams in c:Pder to face harsh

reality.

As the "push" against Jews residing in Russia reached

new severity-> the second part of' the "push-pull theo:i.•y" of

emigration was being filled by tho general acceptance of

immigration to the United States.

The second part of the "push-pull 11 theo1~y of emigra-

tion worked in America. America in the 19th centui•y was

psychologically and physically able to accept a Jewish

Commune just as it had accepted. and modified those men-

tioned as well as numerous others.

While the majority of' Russian Jewish immigrants set­

tled in the large eastern cities, there gradually extended

across the country other Jewish cor.ununities as well as a

handful of Jews who were interested in agriculture. 1 Fore-

most among these were the youthful students who were among

the members of Am Olam from Odessa, Russia.

Efforts were made at Calcasieu Parish, Sicily Island,

Louisiana; at Crimieux, South Dakota; and Cotopaxi, Colo-

rado. For various reasons these g:Poups lasted a very short

time. The island in Loui.s :tana was investc:!d with malaria

carrying mosquitoes and the colon.ists becarne ill and

"i ... The writer's grandfather was an early farmer in the

state of Wisconsin. He had come to this country f!'om Kishnev) Russi.a, in order to escape nervic.e 1.n the army o:i:' the tsar.

Page 50: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

41

disbanded within a year. In other instanc0s, the climate

was too harsh and the soil unproductive~ New Odessa lasted

from 1882-1887 and while net successful :!.n :reference to the

length of its existence, it was the longest lived of the

colonies of JI.Ji! Olam. Abraham Menes wrote,

Established by the first Odessa group of Am Oylam, New Odessa in Oregon was more successful than its sister colonies. 'rhis colony had more socialist than a nationalistic goal. In all probability, it had the best human material for the purpose.l

lAbraham Menes, 11 The Am Oylam Movement," YIVO Annual of Jewish Social Science, Vol. 4, 1949, p. 28.

Page 51: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

CHAPTER IV

NEW ODESSA

"UNITED WE STAND - DIVIDED WE PALL"

By the California. [a shipl arrived a colony of Russian Jews from Odessa, consisting of 28 rnen and some half dozen women. They have rented a build­ing back of East Portland, where they are located for the present. The men are mostly young, only 2 or 3 being married. Several of them are well educated and a1"e drugis ts, angtnee:r~, etc. by profession. 'rhey are in comfortable circumstances and it is thei~ express intention to secure a t1,act of land and settle in a hody as tillers of the so11.l

was the above article announcing the ar-riYal in Portland of

a handful of young Russian Jewish immigrants who would be

involved in a unique agricultural and social experiment.

The fa.r corner of the Pacific Northwes·t was not the

most likely place to find a group of Russian Jewish intel-

lectuals in flight from the per3ecutions of Alexander III.

However, fi-•om 1882-1887. the com.1mne cf New Odessa,. 250

miles south of Portland, Oregon, near the present day town

of Glendale in Douglas County, was the site of this experi-

ment. Withtn those five years, the colony enjoyed relative

prosperity and unity, followed by disunity f'rom w:lthin and

Page 52: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

calamity from without, and finally ended 1n disillusionrnent~

and bankruptcy. This is the stOl"Y of New Odessa, whose

motto "United We Stand, Divided We Fall"l proved to be all

too prophetic.

The first members of Am Olam left Odessa, Russia and

arrived ln New York :1.n January, 1882. There were 65 p~ople

ln that group who had traveled together f1•om Russia by way

of Austria and Germany. They had crossed the bo:rder at

Brody 2 a town on the Russian-Austrian border which l1acl

become a stopping place and a clearing house for the thou-

sands of Jews leaving Russia. ~ne Jews would cross the

border illegally and would have to remain in the town until

either an organization or an individual would assume re-

sponsibility for them. The merr..bers of Am Olam were met by

representatives of Alliance Israelite Universialle, an or-

ganization founded in France to aid Jews once they had left

Russia.. 2

In May, 1882 an additional 400 members of Am Ola'll

left Brody. Among these was Leon Swett who eventually ar-

rived in Portland, Oregon. In a letter which Theodore

Swett, Leonis son, wrote some years later to Abraham Cahan,

lThe mo1~to oi' the commune as written in a letter from a commune mf~r:i.ber and transJ.ated in an article by Abrc.h&m Mene~1, "The Am Oylam Movement," YIVO llrmual of Jewish ~g_ci~l _S~ie.n_c:_~, Vol. 4, 1914 9, p. -29. ·

2Gabriel Davidson and Edward A. Goodwin, 11 A Unique AgricultJ..t:r.aJ. Colony," '.£he R~t'lex, May, 1928, p. l.

Page 53: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

edttor of the Jew~sr~ily FoF..;ard, he described his

father's journey:

They took the train from Brody to Hamburg .••• My father Leon Swett was treasurer of' the Group of 400. It was his responsibility to handle all moneys. Fl'om the day we [Theodore was born in Russia before hi.s fam:U.y emigrated J left Odessa to the day 011r ship landed in New York, my rather as treazurer concealed its gold in 2 money belts, leather, strapped around his body. He was al­ways well guarded. At night my mother wa.s al­ways awake when my father elept. On the last day of our voyage on the sh5.p; all money and goods were distr:tbuted share. and share allke to all members of the group.1

Two additional groups followed within a month.

Among these were those who elected to come to Oregon.

Ninety per cent of them were former students at Russian

universities.

New York City had become the destination for thou-

sands of Jews fleeing from Eastern Europe. The already

established Jewish population of New York had their origins

in Western Europe and had come after the revolutions of

181!8 or were descendants of Sephardic Jews who had come

early in the colonization of America. The established

ll\t'3S, Letter from Theodore Swett Collection, Oregon Historical Societ:y. Prom 'l'heodore Swett to Abraham Cahan, editor of the Jewish Dailv Forward, June 16, 1942. Conver­satlcm w:tth nr:wffliara Sweit, -··13"ortland, ~ grandson of' Leon indicated there is a questio~ as to whether Leon actually visited the sita of New Odessa. After arriving in Port­land., he decided not to joln the colony as he w:is married and had 3 small children and felt that moving to the com­mune wou1.d be a ha:('<iship on his family. Instead, he ob­tained a homestead near Buxton, Cr~gon and farmed there until his death.

Page 54: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

~· -

Jewish comi~unity had found a good life in this country and

did not look favorably upon Jews from the isolated

11 shtet1 111 of Eastern Europe with his quaint ways and cus­

toms.

The American Jew:tsh community had been warned that

among this new emigration of Jews, Am Olam in particular,

there were young Jewish radicals with different political

views and liberal attitudes in 2~eligious observation.

Letters had actually been sent to Jewish leaders in America

from indivj.duals who were worki.ng with the emigr•ants in

Europe, warning of these trouble makers who would undoubt-".)

edly work against the status quo.~

Among these leaders were two remarkable men who even

though they did not necessarily agree with this new 1de-

ology, were in great sympathy with any movement of service

to the Jewish people. Michael Heilprin, an author and

, scholar, already well advanced in years, became their

staunch friend, advisor, and consultant. He devoted his

tirue, often at the expense of his physical well being, to

seek financial aid and other support for their under-

takings. Associated with him was Dr. Julius Goldman, a

1 11shtet1 11 is the Yiddish word for the J~wish small town of Eaistern Europe. l."'or a d1~f'ini ti ve study, see Zborowski and Herzog) Life Is __ J:l:.tt:h f'eople (New York: Int.ernaticnal University Press, 1952). An anthropological study of th~ "shtetl."

2nav1dson and Goodwin) Refle~, p. 2.

Page 55: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

young lawyer, who frequently neglected his C>Wn profession

to give aid to the newly arrived. :!rnmigr-ants.1

On November 30, 1883, Mr. Heilprin wrote a letter

describing the Jei1isl1 agricultur,R1 movement :i.n America to

Oscar Straus~ of the newly organ:l.z~d Baron de H:lrs0h fund

which had been founded in England to aid Jews particularly

interested in agriculture. Ifi an appeal for funds, Mr.

Heilprin described the efforts being made by the members

of Am Olam:

The whole of this movement, for- self'-regenera-· tion, to which old degradation, disappoint~d hope of deliverance through freedom in the fatherlana, and a barbarous persecution have given rise, is an entirely novel, a magnificent phenomenon in the history of modern Judaism. By streng~hening and fomenting th.is movement grand. r1~~sults can yet be achieved. And is it not a duty, is it not commanded by the saJ.d clrcums tances oi' t:·w time 3

which has witnessed such a terrible revival of medievalism, to make a vigorous effort to foster the good which so unexpectedly springs from a source of evil? And does not our Republic offer the best and broadest field for such efforts of ...., Jewish philanthropy and foresight?~

Mr. Heilprin continued to aid in many ways. It was

through his business association with Henry Villard, a.

prime developer of western railways and transportation,

loavidson and Goodwin, Reflex, p, 2.

2MSS Letter from Michael He1lprin to Oscar Strauss, November 30, 1883. Baron de Hil'sch Collaction, Amex·:ican .Jewish Histor:l.cal Society, Waltha~'TI, Mass.

Page 56: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

47

that the decision was made to settle at the site cf New

Odessa.l

The members of Am Olam established headquarters in

New Ycrk in a house on Pell Street calling it the "Com-

mune.!I Still wearing the Russlan ::>tudent's uniform of b1ue

blouse:J and caps, they set about establi::;hing a. ccmmuni.::,

e.xperimentlng with communal living in the heart of New

York's teeming East side. Being without practical trades

or even a basic knowledge of agriculture, they set out to

learn jobs that would. be useful to them, not only because

of the financial necessity, but to gain practical experi-.... c:: ence.

They did not confine their efforts to the New York

area but went wherever the;,.' might gai.n valuable knowledge

and ~xperience. One young man, fer example, went to Vin-

cennesJ Indiana. He was offered positions within the city

but surprised the local Jewish community by not accepting

them'· He f:tnally found a job on a neighborhood i'arm and

worked for eight dollars a month. While these workers were

in places away frorn NeN York, t;hey held th ems elves in

readiness to return as soon ~s ~h~y we~e re~dy to s~t ~P

thi::-ir own enterprise. An example of trie strong communal

2Moses Rischin, The Prorni~ed Citz (New York: Harper Tor·chbooks, 1970), p. r50:·--~--

Page 57: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

48

feelings heJ.d by these immigrants was that when the cal1

cai'1'1e to thf: young ma.n from Indiana where he had worked onl:l

four or five months, even though he was without funds, he

left immediately making his way back to New York by walking 1 and hitching rides on passing wagons.

Not knowlng what heayy labor they might have to do on

a farm, they accepted all kinds of manual jobs. Some went

to Boston as longshoremen while others worked on railroads

rapidly being constructed across the country. Meantime,

between 50 and 60 people remained in the house on Pell

Street. They lived a communal life, dividing the household

tasks and pooling their financlal resources. Educational

meetings were held at night where they learned English,

discussed philosophy, and made plans for their future

colony. Michael Heilprin was their constant advisor. 2

Two scouting parties were sent to d:l.ffe~ent parts of

the country to lool<: fer possible sites. One group went to

Texas 3nd the Mid-west. The scouts worked for three months

on farms in each area to test out the climatic conditions

and the prospects in the area. They found the land in

~exas and Kancaa too arid and the heat depressing. The

other group went to Oregon and Washington. After looking

1Da.vidson and Goodwin~ Befl~x, p. 3.

2Ih1d. ' p. 3.

Page 58: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

over several possibilities, they ~dcommended a section of

land cornpr:tsing 760 acres near Glendale, Oregon. Host o!"

it was forest with about 150 ~cre3 cleared and suitable for

cultivation. There were two modest houses on the property.

The cost was $4800. Two thousand dollars was needed for

the first payment. Through the personal solicitation of

Heilprin, the fu11ount was ra:lsed among interested New York

Jsws. 1

The Gl~ndale site was probably suggested by Villard.

He had become a close personal friend of Heilprin as well

as a business associate. Villard had recently taken ovf:;r

the bankrupt Oregon and California Railroad. 1.rhe Glendale

site was traversed by the new extension which was being

built by O and C from Rosebur·g to Ashland. ft.rriving late

in the surnrner, the colonists would not have an opportun:t ty

to plant the first year. Food, however, was available in

the forests and streams. :i':n addition, by working for the

railroad, selling them timber for ties and fuel, they

would hai,.re an income that would make them self' supporting.

It was at this time that the Chineae began to work in the

area on the railroads and there is zome question as to

whether the colonist:'3 actually workE:d en the . const:r·uction

or ,just in the suppl.yi,ng of lttmber. 2

1Da.vidson and Goodwin, Heflex, p. 3.

2Ibid.

Page 59: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

50

Through the :lntercession of Villard who also had :1n-

terests in a steamship company~ transportation was ar~anged

at $20 per person for the entire trip. In July, 1882,

twenty-five members of Am Ola.m left Nt':W York by steamer

bound for Colon, Panama, cros &ed the is -cffinu.s on fO\'.l'\; and

wagon, boarded yet another f:teamcr f'or Sar1 I'r:m-:!lsco, and

changed to yet anothc:::r coastal steamer• dest:tned for Port-

land. Eight or ten set out for Glendale as soon as they

arrived in Portland. They went by wagon and foot and 250

m:f.les later: south of' Po:::-,tland, on 760 acres of land lo-

cated east of Glendalt;, extendlng from Windy Creek nouth

across Cow Creek and over the ridge to Wolf Creek, a

cooperative colony destine<.! to be ~alled "New Odessa"

finally sank its roots. 1

In general these non-conformist youths found ac-

ceptance in the area. By this time, Douglas Courrty had

several prominent Jewish families. ..rust as in the East,

the first Jews to arr:i.ve in th0 Northwest were nainly tho13e

who had come from Western Europe. Some of them> pa:r·ticu-

larly the merchants had worked their way up the coast from

San Francisco after the California gold rush. The ~1

Olam.ites were accept":d by both the non-.Jewish corriJnt.<nit.;.y and

the resident Jew1.sh group ln Douglas County. The Am Olam·

ites wePe of' particular· interest not only because of* thelr

1Record3 at Douglas County Title Company, Roseburg, Oref~on.

Page 60: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

51

religion but because they were Russians and had adopted

many Russian customs. There was plenty of land and the

people settled in the area wc~e helpful with their advice,

particularly in agriculture, a knowledge that t.he Jews were

sadly lacking,. The colony uf ~ew C1essa b•:!came a. meeting

place for the community and the neighbore would gather•

there to Join in the singing and dancing which the colo-

nists dearly loved, A party at the commune became a spe­

cial neighborhood occasion. 1

The original property of New Odessa was purchased by

Samuel Krimont from Hyman Wollenberg ~na his wife Julia. 2

Records at the Douglas County Title Company record this

sale on March 8, 1883. Further .r•eco1"ds show a bill of sale

dated October 29) 1884 in wh1Gh said property was mort-

gaged at 8% per anum by Peter Fireman, Moses Frie (Pree),

and Abraham Headman acting in the name of the corporation

of New Odesr;a.3

The archives of the Department of Com.merce of the

State of Oregon possess the original articles of

1nav:i.dson and Goodwin, ~fl?_~, p. 3.

2rr.he tm·m ot.' Glendale was ortginally called Julia af­tc1~ Mrs, Wollenberg. The name changed when the Wolh;;n.berg famD.y mo;~Gd the:Lr residence fx•o'ti Canyonv:ille, 7 mile:;; . north and the county seat at that time. When the county seat was later moved to R0scburg, some 30 miles distance, the Wollenberg fanily moved again.

3necorda at Douglas County Title Company, Roseburgt 01•egon.

Page 61: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

52

incorDoration of New Odessa. Dated "first of December in

the :year of our Lord one thousand. and eight hundreds and

eiEY11ty three," it clearly stat.es the a:f.ms and purposes of

the organization. Included are the following articles

which express the voluntary membership within the corpora-

tion:

! . All members of said society do hereby \•oJ.-~ untarily associat~ themsel7es under the name and style of New Odessa communl t:y.

2. The object cf said corpor·1tioo is Mutual assistance in pe:Pf't~cting and jevelopmsnt of phys­ical, mental, and moral capacities of its mem­bers.

3. Said corporation has no caiiitol stock and no shares. The money and l<?_ho:':" voluntarily of­fered by the members shall nevAr te credited for the individual benefits of donators, nor claimed back by withdra.wi::1g me!TI.bers but used only to prc·mote the obj e::;; t: he:t•e:l.n ~p0cified.. The es ti­mated value of tbs goods, chatt0ls, land ~ights and credits owned by th0 said cor(>oration at present is five thouaand dollars.~

The articles are followed by a legal description of

the property 1 signed by Peter Fireman, president; Moses

Free (Frie), secretary; and Abraham Headman, treasurer.

The notary public who witnessed and signi:;td this document

was Solomon Abra.ham, a Jew who had exten~lv-e holdings in

real estate in the area and was a well known merchant

active in local politico. He not only signed his name to

1Articles of Incorporation, Business Archives, Departm~:nt of Co:m,;nerce cf the State of Or·egon, Corporat:!.on Division., Salem, Ores;on. New Odessa Comr.i.unltY1 #3308.

Page 62: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

the document in h1s offlcial capacity, but supported the

colonists in their endeavors.

By 1882, the Jewish population in Portland was large

enough to support two religious congregaticins. '11he city

nor its Jewish population held n~i enticements for these

youths who were interested in an alternate lif'e style.

There had been a sizeable and viable Jewish community in

Jacksonville as early as the 1860's, encouraged to come

during the boom years of the Oregon gold rush. The Jews of

Jacksonville had closer kinah~p ties ·to San Francisco than

to Portland. By the time the seat of Josephine county and

the railroad had been located in Medford and the gold rush

disappeared, the Jewish community of Jacksonville had de-

cl1ned in strength and numbers. Between. Portland and San

Francisco ther~ were scattered Jewish families but no

strong .Jewish community. Of thor:h-1 Jews 11 ving ir1 tl1e area

adjacent to Glendale, Samuel and Asher Marke had come from

Poland in 1852-1853; Hyman Wollenberg had come to Oregon

about 1860; Isidor and Simon Caro came from Colmer, Germany

nettling fir~t in Jacksonville, then going to Ashland, and

finally settling in Roseburg. There was no rabbi between

Portland and San Francisco.1

1George Abd::tll, "New Odessa," 32.t~ Ump_g_ua Trapper, Vol. 1, No. 4, Winter 1965, p. 12.

Page 63: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

54

Why 'l':hen did the mffmb~-n·~ cf Am Olam seek to lsolate

themsc~lves from formali:::ed Judaism by sett~Ung in such a

remote area? It must; be remembered tha-t these young people

were Jews only by virtue of having been identified as ouch

by the Russian eovernment and whatever familial ties t:hey

maintained. They spoke main.ly Russian and be~ause of' their

socialist ideals they professed to no religio11. They made

a habit of staying away from all organized relig.1.on of

whatever domination. They hoped to prove that :l.n a com.mu­

ni.stic cmnmunity without traditional rellgious affiliation

and with the Tolstoyan tradition of return to Mother Earth,

the problems which had haunted Jews over the aenturies

would cease to exist.

By the spring of 1883, there were between 40 and 50

people 1:1.ving in the colony. An additions.l frame building

had been added to the two already standing. On the lower

floor there was a ld.tchen, dirdng room, and an assembly

hall. Th? ·t:pper story was for s leeptng quarters. In one

large room, wh~re with the exc~ption or two or three

couples, all members slept. The beclst~ads were made of

beards nailed togethu.'1'.' and placed ln :rows on the long side

of the room under the eavee with a rough table in the

center of the room for writing.

In that first spring, the crops planted were wheat,

oats, peas, beans~ and a variety of vegetables for their

Page 64: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

own use. An additional 40 or 50 acres of ground was

cleared and broken in the first two years, making a total

1 of 200 cultivable acres.

55

The forests proved to be the major source of income.

In the rccor"ds of the Gardiner Mill cf Glendale, there is

an entry made in 1882 of money paid to the colonist;s of New

Odessa.2 During the fi~st two years, 4,000 cords of wood

were sold to the railroad company. Between $'7 ! 000 nnd

$8,000 was realized in this way and an additional $1,000

was paid on the land contract. The wood was uaed by the

Oregon and Pacific railroad for fuel and for ties, used in

laying track for the railroad which traversed the property.

The O and C offered the colonists an 2dditional contract

for more ties which would have necessitated the building of

a sawmill. There is a difference of opinion as to why

negotiations failed. One, building a mill would have meant

additional funds which were difficult to raise. Two, the

colonists decided by open discussion and concensus not to

commit themselves for a spec~.fied numbt::l" of y0aru by

having a written contract.3

The rajlroad had progressed a8 far as Glendale on Cc~

Creek 265 miles from Portland by May, 1883. An unknown

loavidson and Goodwin$ H~fleY~, p. 4.

2Records of the Gardiner Mill Employees, 1882, Doue;J.as County Museum~ Eoseburg> Oregon.

? JDav.tdson and, Goodwin, Hefl~, p. 4.

Page 65: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

56

writer wrote in a regional publication of taking a trip to

Oregon and described this particular countrys:tde:

Having traversed the greater part of the Pacific slope f'rom Los AngGles to the Columbia river and from· the Pacific oeean to the Ro\'::.ky mountains, I can safely assert that no where can be found so equable and pleasant a climate, such a1versity of scenery and production, mar~ richness of soil or beauty_

1 of' landscape than can be seen on thio

route .....

Tunnel 8 on Cow Creek was completed in t:he summer of 1884

and celebrated by a picnir.~ at New Odessa which was attended ')

by neighbors from the surround1.ng farms.'

Life on the commune in the early days was austere but

harmonious. An itinet•ant farm worker, a non-Jew, worked

there for an enth"e year and comment\'.?d on the remar!cable

quality of these young people, who never quarreled, we:t>e

constantly cheer·ful, permeated w.i.th idealism and who

"labored to save the worlo. 11 3

Their fundamental philosophy was Marxist, "each man

works according to his ab:U1.ty, e·ach man receives act::ordlng

to his needs. 11 TherE! were fixed hours of labor and assign-

ed tasko not only on the farm and in the forest, but also

in the kitchen and in the house. 1rhe men and women shai."ed

all the tasks, field and house. As stated in their Art1-

cles of Incorporation, New Odessa had been organized as a

lThe -~~st Shore, Vol. 8, No. 10, October 1882, p. 184.

2navid~on and Goodwin, Refl5:.~' P~ 5.

3rbid.

Page 66: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

57

voluntary com.rrnmity for t:hE: baR:ts anc purpose of mutual

assistance in the perfection of and development of physi-

cal, mental, and moral capacities of all its members, mak-

ing no differentiation between men and women.

The average age of the original settlers was very

young. At the t;ime of ti1e signing of the Articles of

Incorporation, the president, Peter Fireman was 20, Moses

:ti,ree (Frie) the secretary was 22, and the treasurer Abraham

Headr:1an was 23. Among the original members arriving in

Portland, there were 28 men and 6 'Immen. The exact number

of the o:Piginal group variea with the account but it is

known that the men were mostly young and single. 1

Under the leadership of the officers of the corpora-

tion and the idealism of Paul Kaplau who jolned them 1n.

1883, the community of' New Odessa made a sincere and rel&-

tively successful actempt at a communitarian experience.

On~ of the most derisive and conflicting influences

in the history of the con1nn.rn.ity, was th(~ ideology and

effect of a non-Jew, William Frey, who actually was never

listed as a member of the co:1rmu:11. t;y but 11 ved there by ,

"personal invitation. ;i :B'rey mu~ a pol:l.tical emigre who bud

at o:w time been an officer in the Russian army and had

tary Academy in St. Petersburg. He was a religious

Page 67: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

58

pc•s 1 t:l vi st · .. r110 believed in the religion of Humanity as pro-

PL~ed by the French philosopher Agu3te Comte. During the

J.870's he had attempted to establish several Religion of

Humanity communes in Kansas.

When the Kansas colonies failed, Frey :returned to New

York. Be1.!ause of his knowledge of Russian, he began work-

ing with the newly arrived Russian immigrants. While in-

volved in this work, he met with th.e members of the Com-

mune on Pell street. The residents cf the Commune were

impressed with his philosophy but he was not hopeful of

their ideals as a. basis for a successful community. He

felt they were too nihilistic and unfitted for the tasks

they had set for themselves to establish an agr•iculturF:i.l

community. However, he was willing to help then. He

thought that if they failed in their experiment, they would

be more willing to follow his leadershlp and build on th•.:'!

basis of a common religious faith. In the meantime, by

association with them, he tried to influence them to ac­

cept his philosophy. 1

In 1882}' Frey came to Oregon as one of the advance

scouts. He was still, however, reluctant to join the

group. He warned them that he would be dtfftcult to work

with. He had definite ideas and was not lcnown to

1 ,1vraham Yarmolinsky, A Ri}nsian' s American Dream (LawrF:D(!e, Ka.nsas: Uni vers i t;;:,1--·c;f'fi.11sa~-:Fress-:-I 9·6'5), pp. 99·~100.

Page 68: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

59

compromise. Being harsh with h5mself, he said, he tended

to be harsh with others. He felt mo.re lilce a judge than a

teacheJ'.'. One of' Frey rs ~J..1t:E..3 \·r:.i:s the value vf a complex

family structu1~e in which all mer.lbct•s wculd become Brothen~~

and Sinter::;-, by which the p.ractice of zex would not be c~1n-·

fined to conventional marriage p3ttr~r.m;. This did not mee.n

that he believed in promi~cuity~ but rather that individ­

uals could have more than one marriage partmn~ cs part of

an extended family. He himself had a complicated marriage

situation, with a legal wife whom he had married in Europe

and another• woman also listed on the census as his wife,

having two children. In March, 1883, William Frey, 45,

Ma1'usia (Mary) Frey) 36, Lydia Frey~ 33, and three children

cs.me to live at New Odessa b:f the request and consent of

1 ts mer11bers • 1

Frey and the two women, Marusia and Lydia, were the

only people over the age of 30 listed on the census of the

community. '11hc r.ext oldest was .Joseph Korvitt recorded as

being 27 in the census of August, 1884. Frey had been re­

luctant to go to New Odessa becauze of his previous fail­

ures and the self knowledge that he was an uncompromising

individual. To the youths of the colony, however, he was

someone to look up to, the charismatic leader found neces­

sary in many early cornr.n.mes. He had been exiled because of

Page 69: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

60

h1s strong political belief~ and ooul.d be looked to as a

man of strong convict1on. H~ had evolved a!'ld lived wlth a

philosophy which they felt would be compatible with their

ideas. They felt that his age and experience would be of

great help to them. His Religion of Humanity, ascetic

ideals, and striking personality deeply impressed tht~m. He

spoke Russian and wa.s a friendly voice in a.lien surround-

ings. He convinced thsm that they were pioneers in a true

social experiment.

At the time the Fre;-y- family caree to live at New

Odessa, the community consisted 1:.f 36 males~ four cf them

married, seven females~ and four• children. By the end of

the year, the numbe:i." had ~.ncreased to 60 members and. had

achieved a semblance of economic stability. With the , coming of Frey, a new regimen was established ....

In addition to routine chore~, the colonists studied

mathemati.cs under F1•e.f and English under Marusia and L;y·dia.

The day started at 6 o 'ci0ck w!th chores tmti1 8: 30.

Breakfast was from 6:30 through 9:45. Back to work at

10:00 a.rn. until ~:00 p.m. There was n0 break for lunch as

Frey believed in only two rih:al:~ F.\ day, Between 4 and 5

o'clock dinner was served followed by a rest period and

t.hen on to intellectual pm~suits. Monday,. Tuesday, '1'hurz-

day, and ?r•:tday evenings we:r.e spent studying mo.themat ic3,

1.Abraluun Menes~ 111rhe Am OyJ.am Movement~ 1' pp. 30~· 31.

Page 70: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

61

English, and lectures by ~rey on the philosophy of Positiv-

1sm. Current matters were diDcussed on Wednesday and on

Saturday they discussed the problems of the commun1.ty.

This description was taken from a le';;ter from one of the

colonists and continues:

On Sunday we risf..~ at sJ.x o'clock and immedi­ately a lively discussion begins on the subject of equal rights for women. In the beginning the women had demanded full equal rights. They had gone to work in the forest, with the men taking their turn in the kitchen and laundry. Soon, however, the women realized that they were not yet fit for that type of work and re­turned to their previous tasks. Now they as­sure us that th~y have acquired the necessary physical strengt.h and endurance for work in the forest • • • • Thus the time passes till breakfast. This meal consists of rice, oat­meal, baked and r;;.w applf~s, beans, potatoes, bread and milk .•.• ~fter breakfast, one member goes to survey the far.rr~, anoth~r reads the newspaper or a book, the rest shout, sing, and dance. At four o'clock dinner is served. Two men wash the dishes, the choir sings, the organ plays •••• At seven o'clock the evening begins a session of mutual ~riticism; then the work for the week is assigned.l

Since the majority of the members had been university

students, their diversions remained mainly intellectual.

The chief nightly entertainment was to gather in the assem-

bly hall to discuss, argue, and debate. In addition to the

study of mathematics and EnglishJ one night a week was

spent in self cr•iticd.sm at wh!ch they wel'e encouraged to

pass .iudgment on one another and suggest ways in which to

lM-n-s , .. c lj , "The fu.1! Oylam Movement, 11 p. 31.

Page 71: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

62

improv0 the community. Their pr:1ze p0ss0ssion was an

extensive library devoted chiefly to books on philcsophy. 1

A simple pleasure that the com..'llu.ne members did manage

to find time for and enjoy, was wuaic. Even doing the most

difficult tasks, the men and women would join in the sing-

ing, mostly Russian folk songs and songs of their student

days. In the early days, having no inst.rmnents, they

would dance to their own singing. Although they knew a.nd

danced Russian dances, their favorite became the American

style quadrille. They later received a small organ and

!•'IH:i'.''..:sia Frey, an accomp.l:!.shed mus iciar:.; would play for

them. They would. give da.nces and invite the ueighboring

farmers_ and settl.ers. In this otherwlse isolated front:tr~r

town, the neighbors would come eagerly and join in the

festivities. As social happenings were so rare in frontier

times, the settlers would often come from great d.istances. 2

Frey continued to preach his Relig:ton of Humanity.

He never lost an opportunj.ty to instill the Positivist note

into the discussion hours. The Sunday discussions gradu-

ally turned into religious services. Marusia played hymns

on her crgt.n and the lectures turned into sermons. New

Year's Day 1884, was celebrated as a F·estival of Humanity.

"I

... George Abdill, 11 New Odessa," The 2™1:!& Tr•apper, Vol. 2, No. l, Spring 1966, p. 16.

2 8 Ibid., p. 1 •

Page 72: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

11 The semitic x•ace," concluded Prey, 1111aving given the world

three great religions, was now r~ady to give the world the

faith of the t·uture, the Religion of Humanity. nl

Although the land proved to be fruitful and the food

in the fore~t.s and streams was plentiful, the colonists

subsisted on a maager diet. Frey was a vegetar•ian and not

only would. hA. no;; eat meat, but refu~H~d to s1 t at the table

with anyone who did. The theory of life of these comrnuni-

tarians forbade them tc gorse themselves when there were

millions of suffering and hungry people in the world. The

daily food budget which they allowed themselves by 1882

prices was 5¢ per day per person and anything over 8¢ per

day was felt to be extravagant. The total daily expense

per person was figured to be 15¢. A visitor to New Odessa

wrote:

Frey's idea of happiness is to eat two meals a day of crackers and raw fruit, to touch no kind of stimulant, to do all work between meals to be free to study, the evenings in his community to be devoted to study and moral and social evalua­tion in which all should join.2

In. 1884, Fre~r drafted "An Agreement" which was to be

signed by all members which dedicated them to the "achieve-

ment, at least within the limits of the association of the

lyarmol insky, Rusnlan' s Amcl"ican Dream, p. 103. '")

t:.!b1d., p. 105.

Page 73: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

6 ll 1 '

pr.inciples of al truism~ self perfect ion, ccirrunon property,

and moral coope~aticn that eventually will have to be prac­

ticed by all men. 111

He prepared a talk 1n 1884 which he delivered to the

neighbors of the &ettlement for the purpose of acquainting

them with its character and aim. He explained the com-

mune's renunciation of all personal property. They had

come not to make money but to t-;hare as "~ommun:tsts,

pioneers in a social exper~.ment." He assured the audience

that the colonists abhorred sexual promiscuity and that

they respected if did not practice monogamic marriage. He

specifically used the word respected and not accepted.

Frey wrote to a co-religionist in 1884 that New

Odessa had become the scene of a miracle through the intro-

ducticn of a religion that enabled the members to create a

true commune. This was a biased outlook as by no means all

the members enbraced his religious beliefs. Out of defer-

ence to Frey, those who respected him paid lip service to

him. 'rhe more revolutionary under the leadership of Pau1

Kaplan, were actively against it. During discussions when

Frey would take over, Kaplan, a small dark man would sit

grinnin~ at him and staring with da~k penetrating eyes.

Those few who regretted the absence of religion, felt that

lnavidson and Goodwln ~ Reflex_, p. 4.

Page 74: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

if any religion was to be observed, it should be Judaism.

The first seeds of dizcontent had been so~n.l

A happy occasio~, a wedding, was described in much

65

detail in the December 1885 issue of the Overland Monthly.

It was called a 11 Wedd1.ng Among tne Comrnun1stlc! Jews of

Oregon." The unknown author was more interested in the

fact that the community was Russlan and that the membe1~s

were communists rather than Jews. This attitude was re~·

flective of the feeling toward religion in Oregon. America

was considered large enough to accomrnodate members of many

religions. The curiosity was diracted towards the unknown

customs of the Russians and the fact that these members

were avowed communists, someth:tng rare and different on the

American frontier. By getting to know these gentle youths,

however, their neighbors accepted them as long as they did

not try to impose their ideas of government on ethers.

The wedding described wa3 between two of the early

colonists, Anutta Glantz and Selig Rosenbluth. There is no

document of the wedding as the Douglas county marriage

records do not go back that far. According to a son Robert

Owen Ro2enbluth, who had been born after his parents left

New Odessa, there was one brother born on July 28, 1883

while they still lived in th.e community. There is no ot:her

evidence that the wedding took place before Frey had come

lyarmolinsky, Russian's P~erican Crea~, p. 105. ----- ··-----

Page 75: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

66

to live there, so it pro~ably took place in the early days

of the comm;,inity. There is no reco1•d en the census of Au­

gust 18814 of either the br·ide or groom and it is known

that; they were among the first to leave.

The bridegroom had been smuggled out of Russia in

the bottom of a wagon load of hay. He had been a veteri­

nary student in Russia. After coming to America, he had

worked on a farm in Pennsylvania to gain experience in

agriculture. It is not known exactly when he joined the

community. Communal law decreed t:hat a man must serve as a

cook on Sunday and it was Rosenbluth's lot to be assigned

to the kitchen on his wedding day. The colonists were

strict about keeping to their schedules and he could not

change his duties. The women of the community voluntarily

offered to £1.~~ him prepare the wedding feast. Rosenbluth

was not a vegetarian and so in the morning he shot a rabbit

and coolced :1.t as a ragout for the dinner. In honor of the

occasion, pie was also on the menu, and the initials of the

bride and groom decorated the crust of each pie.

Wild flowers were woven into wreaths to be worn by

both the bride and the groom. The bride was a dark haired,

dar·k eyed e:tghteen year old. Sbe wore a close fltting

black dress without any ornamentation. Whe:i she finished

dressing, she tied a thick Russian towel embroidered with

red silk on as an apron and went into the kitchen and baked

more pie:;;.

Page 76: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

67

The Brothers and Sisters gathered at 6 o'clock, two

hours later than usual 1 i.n the dining room, and vrhen all

were present the bride and groom entered. After prolonged

embracing by all members in a "Russian 11 and "J'ewish 11 man-

ner, they had what for them was an enormous meal. At the

end of the dinner, eve1~yone helped in doing the dishes and

cl.earing up. The entire assembly went upsta:Lrs where the

hall had been decorated with flowers and gref.m leaves.

There was a service in English followed by a ball. A table

was placed at one end o!' the room and decorated with

wreaths and cand.lesticlrn. The bridal pair seated them-

selves on a bench behind the table.

A member of the community, it is not known who, an-

nounced that he would marry the couple. He began to recite

poetry in English:

What dajr is it: ds.1"'k or fair? Brings its future joy or care? What ray this morn broke through the night? Did the ray herald black or white?l

The poem was lengthy but after the reader finished

there was no further ceremony and the festivities began.

The waltz, the polka, and particularly the quadrille were

danced to the num0ers being called in Russian.

'I'he new couple r.et·Lr·ed qulte early to a crude cr-.bln

which had been assigned to them. Tile ball continued

lunknown writer) "A WedcUng Among tht1 Commtmistic Jews in Oregc.n, 11 Oygr.l_§:~ Mqn..:~.b_±y, SeJ:>ies 2 ~ Vol. 6, D0 ce"1b""1 ~ i)Or:.; D ~

.. .:1 ..:o!i t ~~ !.. =- .L 0 U .J, ~ • 01.. ~· ;

Page 77: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

68

through the night. 1"11'.'"le writer of the article a\':oke 1.n the

morning after having retired late, only to find that the

festivities were still continuing with a final repast in

the k1tchen. 1

1l1he colony prospered and was relatively harmon:tou2

for about two years. At its height j it had a population of'

65. Two of the four single women became wives of male

members. Other male members looked !'or wives i.n Portland

and the surrou!lding areas. One colonist died of unknown

causes and was buried on the colony'~ property but the

gravestone has never been found. 2

The lack of privacy was especially trying to the

married .couples and the s!ngle men found the lack of young

unmarried women to be a difficult and unnatural situaticm,

One of the members complained that there were comrades who

confused communism with eating from the :::iame plate and

sleeping in the same bedroom.

In early 1884 the membership began to polarize around

the leaders Paul Kapla.n and William Frey. Kaplan, one of

the fcum1.e:;.•s cf the commu.ni ty) wa:::- a radical conmnmis t in

complete oppositicn to Frey's concern with raligion. Frey,

true to his own s~l..f evalnation, would not compromise with

his princ1pl~9. The exact date of his leaving is not known

1The information about the wedding comes from the article in Oyer];_?.!}.d Motu;h1y.s pp. 606-11.

2 Abdill, The Umps@~. Trapper, Vol. 2, p. 18.

Page 78: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

but he is still list0d as of August: 180~ and it is est1-

mated that he stayed about a total of two years. Frey and

about 15 members elected to leave the community of New

Odessa by 1885, For a few months they remained in the area

trying to farm, but lack or capital hindered them and they

1•etu:rned to New York. Marusia retui-•ned to New Yorlc wt th

Frey, but Lydia, who was referred to in the colony as his

sJ.ster-in-law, remained behind with her child and married

one of the members. The marriage ceremony was conducted by ,

Frey before he left.•

Among the colonies established in the United Sta.'tes

by Am Olam, New Odessa proved to last the longest, and be

the most successful. Dr. Judah Wechsler, a rabbi of St.

Paul) Minnesota, who had been instr•umental in establish~.ng

the colony at Painted Wood, North Dakota, visited New

Odessa ln its early days and expressed his admiration.

The colonists are the most intelligent Russian immigrants I have encountered. rrhey ax•e men and women who have attended a university or a similar institut:ion of learninh in Russia. . . • Whereas

- - -1

1.n 0 1.tr colon~· ~ f alritcd Wood J there is dis cord to this very day, here [Now Odessa1 all live in

2 peace, and the will of one is the will of all.

He wcs amazed to see the large well-organized li~rary and

hear all the members participate in discussions on differ-

ent problems. Dr. Wechsler did not approv-e of all aspl~cts

') '"-Menes, "1l'he Am Oylam Movement~ 11 p. 32.

Page 79: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

70

of the community, however. He was aga:l..r.Gt its com.munlst

principles and was shocked at the absence of all Jewish

observance. He felt that the isolation from a center of

Jewish population would prove to be detrimental.

Frey's leaving did not solve the disunity in the

colony. Shortly after he left, there was a fire in the

community building and the treasured library was coffipletely

destroyed. Marxism was practiced even more rigorously, but

the idealism had begun to wear off. Ambitious and ideolog~

ically orientated members worked harder, but others shirked

their responsibilities. As long as they worked, income was

not a problem. 1 Additional payments in the amount of $ 3:;00

had been paid on the original mo~tgage, but there was an

catstanding balance of $2,276.2

The members of New Odessa were well thought of in the

outside communities and the mortgagee did not threaten to

foreclose. On the contrary, Sim~n Krimont was willing to

extend payment for an additional 15 years. Local Jewish

merchants and some from 3J3 far away as Portland, offered to

extend credit to them as an inducement to stay. The neigh-

boring farmers had been impressad with the idealism and the

...

.... 'bdi., 1 .11. • "'°"'-' The UmDOU? Tra_R~er, Vol. 2, p. 19 •

2Foreclosure records, Douglas County Courthouse, Roseburgs Oregon.

Page 80: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

71

spirit of the original group, and continued to offer them ,

the use of equipment which the colony did not possess.~

Members began to leave singly and in groups afte:r• the

departure or Frey and the property began to fall into

neglect. Olger Sether, a present resident of Glendale now

in his 80's, whose family had purcha;;ed the property on

which the colony stood, recalled coming to the Glendale

area as a boy. None of th'-~ members had remained in th>?

area but he remembered tc.llcing tc some of the older resi-

dents of Glendale. As a boy, he loved to hear stories of

New Odessa. In a conversation with him, he told of how the

members were first respected but after 1885 when the group

had split into two, '!;hey were remembered primar·ily for

lying around ell dhy, sleeping$ reading, and discussing. 2

On March 16, 1887 action was instituted by R. s.

Bean, Circuit Court Judge of the Second Judicial District

of Ox•egon statim:~ "Defendants non-resj.dent and cannot be

found - suit made upon tl1e defendants. :i On October 18,

1887 a bankruptcy suit was filed in the Circuit Court of

Douglas County by S. Marks and H. Wollenberg vs. Simon

Krimont, Peter Ii'irermn, Moses Prel (Free) and Abraham

Headman, trustees of the~ New Odessa Community.3 The:

1Abdi11, The Um.r_g_}la Trapper, Vol. 2, p. 20.

2Personal conversation with Olger Sether, July, 1973.

3Records at the Circuit Court of Douglas County, Roseburg~ Oregon, Basement Box 56.

Page 81: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

72

Roseburg Revi§:~i duly ca:i.""':r.ied thE: public notices of the

foreclosure but there was no word heard from the defendunts

or their representatives. Foreclosure proceedings were re-

corded in February, 1888 and the lands of New Odessa were

returned to the original holders. It was not until

December 31, 191!5 by B.ction of the Corporation Commission

of the State of Oregon that the community of New Odessa was

officially dissolved. 1

New Odessa has been referred to by Abraham Menes as

a "short 11Yed experience rather thRn a true experiment in

communal 1.i v:tng. 11 What makes the difference?

lArticles of Incorporation! Department of Commerce, State of' Oreg~n, Corporation Division, New Odessa Community #33Cl8.

Page 82: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

SUCCESS OR FAILURE

The town of Wolf Creek is six miles from Glendale on

the old sta~ecoach rout~ from San Francisco to Portland.

The ~olf C~eek Inn is a large frame buil<ling, once white,

which was an overnight stopping place on this route. In

1883. when New Odessa was a ftu'lctionlng community~ this waz

still the "wild and wooly 11 West. Or::. Saturday, .tiugust 11,

1883 the Wells Fargo Stage was roboed eight miles from

Glendale. The three passeng~)rs were m1harmed and $10 v:as

stolen. 1

In J.974, there is a comnmn:U;y of young f-H~0pl!: living;

in the Inn, mal·:ing an attempt at corr.tn' .. mal living. Are they

awa.2~e of the pro:~iifflty of just such an attempt at an alter-

native style of living wh1cn took place almost a hundred

years ago? Do they reccg~izc the successes and failures of

t tme and ::; pa.ee, hist.or J ca1.ly ar.d soo.tn1oglcal1y from the

rest of Oregon society?

The word success is an amorphous term wnose meaning

changes every time it is used. It is a q"alitative

achievement that cannot be determined by quantitative

.,

... f'._c!.1~:!:.~1-ID.9!21?.endent~ Hoseburg, Oregor., August 11,

Page 83: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

mo;asurement. The obsolete mean:1.ng is 9utccim~ or ~:es ult,

implying neither good o:r.• bad. Today, the dictionary de-

fines it as 11 the attainment of wealth, favor, or em~ .. nence. it

This definition may also be <.!onsjdered obsolete, for what

may be cons:tdered a success by one person may just as cer-

tainly be considered of as a failure by another.

Dr. Ka,nter in Commitnent and Community1 classified

utopian communities from 1780-186C as successful or un3uc-

cassful by the length of time of the:Lt• existance. In ord~r

to be successful a community had to exist for twenty-five

years, the sociological definition of a generation. On

this basis, New Odessa would be considered unsuccessful as

it lasted for only five years (1882-1887).

If the success of New Odessa is measured in relation

to its having achieved Utopia in its basic meaning of

heaven on earth, the answer becomes a qualified yes, again

depending upon one's definition of heaven. Margaret Mead,

a suppl)rter of Utopian thought and communal living has

written 11 descriptions of heaven are always much less inter-

esting than descriptions of hell." Once a Utopia has been

achieved, there is nothing left to strive for. 2

1 ... Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Commitment and Com!flu..::rii~:l,_

(Cam.brldge, Mass.: Harvard Universj,ty Press, 1972), p. 24 5'

')

l.Margaret Mead, "Towards More V:lvid Utopias, 11

Sc.j_en.c.e, 126, l:Iovember 8, 1957 j pp. 957-61.

Page 84: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

75

For n short period of time, life in New Odessa was

secure and fulfilling. '.:-he youne Russian Jew:tsh immigrants

had found a haven from religious persecution. They were

al:owed to practice their beliefs that agriculture was a

mean~ to Jewish survival. As long as they kept their

political ideologies within the tr community j they wel'•e not

restricted or hampered in their style of living. Life was

secure on the basis of physical necessities for they had

adequate shelter. The community had an income from its

wood cutting and they had ample food which grew in their

fields or took from the woods and the streams. Once the

physical needs were met, however, the spiritual idealism

took on a greatez• importance. The physical isolation was

not as great as the cultural.

Their desire for furthering their education was e 11'1-

dent by tha studies which they pursued regularly among

themselve~, Their library was a large and extensive one

and when f:tre destroyed the community building, the library

which was housed in it, was completely consumed by the

flames. This was a blow from which they never quite

recovered.

It is difficult to know exactly what went wrong, as

there JS little written evidence. The fact that not one

meriibt::r• remained in the immediate aren or even in the

Pacific Northweat, proves that the members felt isolated

i'rom the large cent:;;.rs of educat:1.on and thrmght. Will:tam

Page 85: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

'16

Frey and the members -which left: New Odessa with him, re-

mained in the area for only a short period of time and then

went to New York. When the remainder of the comm:mity

finally broke up, eight or ten mgmbers went to San Fran-

cisco and found jobs in the newly established steam laundry

business. They later returned to New York City and estab-

lishad a communal laundry on Essex street and llvnd in a

commune in a house on Suffolk street. They remained to­

gether for four or five years. 1

The lack of educational facilities is also qu:l.te

evident as a reason f'or disso1~11ng thr:: communi.ty. The

great majorlty of the members had been students in Russia.

Some of them had left the universities because they were

forced to. They came to America where education was avail-

able to them even if they were Jews. By settling in the

spar3ely populated Northwest with few educational facili-

ties, they were denied an education not because of reli-

gion, but because of geog:r-aphy. When they retm"ned to New

York, the evidence shows that most of them returned to

universities.

William Frey becane a physicien and practiced in New

York. The bride desc~ibed in the wedding in Chapter IV,

af'te:r having three r.hild1'en, two of tt.•,e-m born in New

Odos~~a~ !"eturned to tlie univer'sity and also became a

1George B. Abd:tll, 11 New Odessa," Th~ __ Ym29.~.? __ ~f~ra~J.:, Roseburg, Oregon, Vol. I, No. 4, 1955, p. 20.

Page 86: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

physician. Her son, Robert Rosenbluth, in a letter to

George B. Abdill, director of the Dou~las County Museum,

wrote that his mother became known as the "petticoat doc-

tor. 11 She practiced among the very poor of New York.

.., ., Ii

When she needed bandages and she couldn't afford them, she

would take off her sta1'ched white petticoats and tear therr.

into bandage strips. 1 Robert Rosenbluth was not born in

New Odessa but his brother and sister were. He wrote 1n

the letter that the only other child born in New Odessa,

Helen Horvitt, beca~e a dentist.

Paul Kaplan~ idealistic leader of the community, also

returned to New York and studied medicine. He finished his

studies in Berlin and returned to work on the East side of

New York in the poorest neighborhoods. He was active as an

advisor for the Baron de Hirsch Fund which helped those

interested in agricultural colonization. Kaplan renained

act:tve in tbe Corru11unlst Party· in America. At the time of

the 1917 Revolution 1n RusBia, he was appointed Secretary

of the Rus s.'.i.an Revolutiona:-y Party in America. He he came

known as the 11 :B1 ath"!l" of the Russian Revolution :tn America."

As he grew older, he became less revolutionary but remained

a socialist all his life. He was a friend of Felix Adler

and L.tllian Wald, and with thE:m was a pioneer in the pro-

gressive Bocial work movement. When he died, his plain

lrietter from Robert RoseHbluth to George 3. Abdill, A .... J 4 - 9 6 r:: ,,n ... 11 ,. .. 4 n l ,,., t v; ugus v .. , l. .,,1) t>..:.h-:• co . ..:.1C~..:.on ai:; uoug as t....oun y 11.useum, Roseburg, Oregon.

Page 87: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

7R ;U

easket was covered with a simple wreath inscr1bed "From His

Comrades."1

The last known survivor of New Odessa, Peter Fireman,

became a chemist and later a millionaire on the basis of

his discoveries. Fireman also maintained his interest in

comn1unism. After the n~volution in Russ:ta, he returned to

his native country (1917-1920). He believed that the first

priority of the peasants was an education. For the cost of

a million dollars, he built a pencil factory in Russia~

hoping to give everyone the tools of writing. As soon as

the factory was in production it was conf iacated by the

Soviet gover:n .. >nent and a disillusioned Fireman returned to

the United States. He lost his interest in the Party and

died without heirs in 1950 at the age of 94 2

Not only did th~~ members of New Odessa finish their

::; tud ies, but; their basic ideologies rerr:a ined the same.

They had a tendency to be reformers, to be concerned and

in~ere~ted in the social welfare of their fellow men.

Even F'ireman, who became wealthy, in his own misguided ways

showzd t15 ~oncern for others.

In Chapter III, Dr. Kantsr's work on the criteria of

communal livlng was discussed. How did NeH Odessa n.t

J.Ihmry Moslrnwit~~ .. "Paul Kaplan: An East Side Patriot, 11 ·rh.::_ Out)ook, January 16, 1918 ~ pp. 108-,09.

Page 88: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

~(9

into these ps.tterns? The first was the concept of' human

perfectibility within a small isolated environment. Con­

fession and self criticism were means of achieving perfec­

tion. Certainly, New Odessa with its weekly evenings

devoted to mutual and self criticism met this requ:trem~nt.

The orderly life of New Odessa with its assigned

tasks, planning of living space, meals, and studies, also

fits into the pattern. The third ideal of broth~rhood was

so basic that it was included within the Articles of Incoi•­

poration. The members were called Brothers and Sisters.

Shared ownership was also laid out in detail in these sa11e

articles. Not only was shared ownership fundamental to the

community but also a shared J.iv:!.ng experience.

Kanter includes the presence of a strong cherismatic

leader as essential for the success of a community. Wil­

liam Frey with all his eccentricities, was a forceful per­

sonality and was influential in the arrangements within the

commun:Lty if only for a short period of t11n.c. It was his

leaving that:. bee;an the ultimate breakup of the commune.

Paul Kaplan was also a strong leader but of a very dif­

ferent character than Frey. While Frey remained at New

Odessa, there was friction between them. When Frey left,

it was Kaplan who took O\rer the responsibilities of leader­

ship. Perhaps it was the presence of two strong personal-

1t1es of different persuasions that speeded the process of

brealrnp.

Page 89: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

80

In try1.ng to find t.he answ~:~r to the quest;ion of suc­

cess or failure, New Odessa arid the Am 013Jn mc.-ivement might

be compared to the Kibbu.t ~; movemer:t tn Is:c'ael. One of the

alternate solutions to the survival of the Jews in the late

19th century in Russia 3 was the establishmen-.S of Palestjne

as a National Home for the JewiEh people. The BILUIM

attempted to establish an agricultural movement in Pales­

tine at the same time that Am Olam made tts decision to

settle in the United States. The agricultural movement,

begun in the 1880's in Palestinej developed into the

Kubbutz movement after 1907 and is still flourlshing in

Israel today.

Religious attitudes were similar to a certain degre0

bet;ween the BILUIM and the membe:r•s of Am Olam. While some

of the Kibbutzim were orthodox in their attitudes towards

religious Judaism, others accepted Judaism as a national­

ity. For them to be in Palestine was proof of their

.Jew:i.:;.hness. They did not seek the ritual and observances.

Arn Olarnites accepted Judaism as a nationality without

rellgious ties.

A stong religious bond between the scattered colonies

of Am 0.ld.~n ln the United States may have s€rved ;1s a co­

hesive force and lessened the sense of isolation of the

communities. The members of New Odessa, hcwever, had no

interest in religion of any denomination. They had been

classified as Russ1&n Jews and the cultural tie~ they

Page 90: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

maintajned were rnore closely associated with Russia than

with Judaism. This w2s one of the anomalies of their

Bl

situation. In Russia they had been denied the rights of

citizenship beco.vsc they were Jews; in this count1•y they

chose to glorif:f thelr Russian he!'itage. '11here is no evi­

dence to oho~ thRt after leavi~g New Odessa, the members

sought to renew their religious ties or whether they

bec~~me tctally a.asimilated.

Sirnilai- to Am Olam conununities, the Kibbutzim were

situated in isolated areas) but they maintained contact

with each other and worked and planned as a network in

providing services for their members. There were and are

great differences between Kibbutzim, but the pioneer

leaderEhip thought and planned for the education of the

children, mutual protection in hostile territory, medical

care,, etc. At New Odessa, there was little 1.f any but

casual ~ontact between the widely scattered ccmmunities.

There was no planning for the future. In Oregon, the

neiehb0rs of New Odessa were friendly and often helpful tc

the ccrnmun1t:-r ?.nd :tts members,

In Palestine, it was ne~essary to strengthen the

tenuous ties between Kibbutzim for survival rather than to

:ignore them a.s i 1~ was possibl.e to do in the United States.

The geog:i~aphic isoJ.at i.on :: n a hostile country of' the

Ki.bbutztm forced tr.em to maintai.n contact with each other.

Page 91: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

82

Once the :lmmediate question of' :·nu0 vival was sol\"ed by

the Am Olam com."Tlunities, they tended te :-;et~ themselv~s

apart and sonsh~.;; to pl:r•sw~ their own spir~:.tual and 1deolog-

:!.cal ways. There wa:."' great truth ln thelr motto Ii United We

Stand,, Divided We Fall." 'I'he days of greatest strength and

harmony were also the days of greatest uni t.y and hardest

work. As the members grew acclimated to the American way

of life; of being allowt:d to make choices, the •:!ornmunity

began to break up.

New Odessa was important not onl~,r as a single social

experiment but it was a challenge to its contemporary ways

of life~.

'£he Utopian community itself rep:resenti:i a model for a dift\:::rent kind of comr.mni ty organlzat ion, on from which community planners can der:i.ve a different set cf options •••• Utopias strive to implement :'-deals of' a better way of living and relating, to consider options and alternatives, to become structurally inventive, and to experi­ment with wholly new social worlds. Utooj.an communities a.re society's dreams.l ·

New Odessa was an attempt to bring out the best

ideals in man, a willingness to sacrifice and to share.

'Ioo often American .. rew:'tsh history i.s the story of' Jews who

stayed in the big cities, surrounded by co-religionists in

a eult1J.r<:il enYiromnent wht.ch tb~y brought wlth them and d.!.d

not change for several generations. There were Jews who

were pioneers. 'rhere were Jews who ventta•ed away from

CortHnitmen1; c:..nc: Ccmmun:l.t~{ ~ up. -----------------··----.. ~· ... 236-37.

Page 92: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

t~e big cities anj tcwns and tried to find a new style of

living.

New Odessa was not successful in terms of length of

existence. But, among those who were members and their

descendants who have been traced, it is evident that

there was instilled a strong sense of social obligation,

of man's responsibility to man. America .is made up of

many dive1'se groups and even a11ong ethnic classifications

there can be no one person or organization that speaks for

all.

Outside of the intrinsic value in the study of his-

tory, an analogy can be made between New Odessa and the

present. At first recreating the history of New Odessa was

lj.ke putting the pieces of a giant jigsaw puzzle together.

The bits and pieces began ~alling into place and even

though there were pieces missing, a picture bagan to

emerge. This picture had many aimilarities to the scene of

the Jews in Rusaia today. What gradually appeared was a

story that is as applicable today as it was in the 19th

century.

Anti-semitinm ia as rife today in the Soviet Union

aa it ~as in Tsari3t Russia, yet in spite of the officials

trying to deter them by various methods, Jews are leaving

now as they did then. Again there are the two choices:

Isr&f:l m." thf; United .States. The great. di.fferences between

then and now 1 ars that in the 19th oentury there was no

Page 93: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

84

~ndependent otate cf Israel. In the 19th century Marxism

was looked at as a utopian ideal. Today's Jews in Russia

are the product of a Marxist '3ociety and in leaving Russia,

leave for ostensibly different ideals than thei~ fore­

fathers who preceeded thew. Basically the same issue :1.s

at stake, the right to remain Jews without prejudice or

penalties.

The history of the Jewish people has been recorded

for a great many centuries~ but in some reHpects it never

changes. The Jews of New Odessa saw their utopia as a

solution to the plagues which have followed them from time

to time and country to country. Each generation seeks to

find its own solutions and sometimes they are not even

aware that they have been tried before.

The train left ;runnel 8 nea1" Glendale. Except for

the treee that still are standing and the creek that runs

swiftly across the property, there are no living witnesses

to New O<~e:::.sa. 'lrne story of New Odessa is a footnote .in

t:hl~ history of America, a :::.tory of 65 people who were not:

content to f'oliow the usua) 1.mmigra.nt path but who S!.rnght

by thelr drcarm; and fer a short period cf time, a w:tlJ.i.ng-

ness to reake ~he~ live.

I

Page 94: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abd.:U.J, G(;ocrgf~ A. "New Odessa. 11 Umpq:.u~.--J,.~~~~ryer 5 Vol. 1, No. 4~ Winter 1965.

AbdtJl, G~orge A. 11 New OdesE•a." UmP.qua Ti~an_per, VoJ.. 2, No. l> Spring 1966.

Banc!.t-oft, .~ If1~t1c~1"'t I•'ra.nc:1;;; co:

Howe. Histot,y 0f' Ore_e;on. The Histo1~y Co •• 1888.

2 V<»l. 8an

Baron, Salo W. The Russian Jew Under Tsar and Soviets. New York: MacMi11ari-Uo~- 1964.

Beecher, Johnathan and Bienvenu, Richard. Vision of Charl~s Fourier. Boston: 1971. -

'fi1e Utqii_~!in. Beacon Press,

Ben Gur:ton, David. Bebirt.h. and_Dest_inv of ~src:~~l. I~ew York: Philosophical Library, 1954-.

Bester, Arthur. Backwoods Utooias. Philadelphia: Univers1ty of PennsylvanlaPress, 1950.

Be3 tor-, .~x·'c,hur. Society. 11

1953.

"Patient-Office Models of the Good Awerican Historical Review. Vol. 58,

Bo0rst~in, Daniel. The Americans. New York: Random Hcrnse, 1973.

Carey, Cha~l2s H. r~:tr:f o~·;-j ': .:, nd

C()~J~c.l~J'li F·3.l~1 i-C~ Uni V(:11"3lty

l?ort_la.r~d:

I

Page 95: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

86

Cole, New York:

Cooley, Char.lcs Horton. Soc:ial Qr€;e.nJ.:Z:.~tlon. First pub­lished in 1909. New York: Schoken, 196?.

Davidso~, Gabr1e1.. Our ?Jgcher, 1943.

Sew5.sh Farr::ers. -·--·--------- Ne\'\1 York: L. B.

David::;onJ G~briel and Gocd·,{in, Edwar•d A. ''A Unique Agri­cultural Colony." Reflex, Mc.y 19?.B.

Dav h~, ;rerome. The Russ :i.an Imrnir:ra.nt. New York; Ame:rican Immicratiori Ser•:::es~-Arno?r'ess~ 1969.

New York: Hole~

Duhnow, S. M. 3 Vols. 1918.

Historv of the JeHs :tn Rnss1~. a:-1d Pol.:m:1. "Ph 4 1 .., d,...._.e ln-}1-:\-;..-:· T C>t ·is h .t"'"' ttb, ... -,,. a·-t .. -01;,-,Tc r-:-;-;;,-.;:·,, •. , .t ... o,_ • - ,. , .: . .i:.~ • <.I •.;;r' u · . .J.. .L -~ .I. • .; 1 , .. ~ '- ~«Y ,

Dub now, Simon. t{9tionalism__i:::_~.£._Jjts t~.. Cleveland; World Publishing Co., 1961.

Eban, Abba. My ~eople. New York: Random House, 1968.

Egbert, Donald Drew and Persons, Americ~n Ljf~. Princeton: ---T-> --~ -·~-. ·---·---~-.. -::~ 7'0 € ~) 8 !'• :! .. 9 5 2 ~

Stow, ed. Sociali2m and Prl nee ton Ui1.1.ver.s1 ty --

Cambridge:

Fla1mf..!:ry. E-h;a~d. The Anr.:-,ui:3h of the Jew;-:;. New York: '1 .. l '"• _:. N11 ·i 1 a ·1 f' •• ·--,- () "{:,-;). ·---' 1'.'..-.. i. ... ·11. -. ,,.r,.,.,. c:J t l...ll., ~ ' A .. : t"". •

Fc>gre .. ty, Hcb~:rt S. Am·~ricrtn Utor»i:.§nt:.~.B· Itasca, Illino:!.s: ? , P. Poac::i\;l~, ·-y~rr2-:-

Hew York; Ballantine

Gao ton, .Joeeph. '.£.!.!~:_ C.,:~E~~~l."':.:"1~.P ~h._ __ H ~-st o_:i:_;L_Q!:__Qt~ . .f'.On l 811-1912. i;flica.r_:o: S. iT. Clrirtl~c!I 1912~

Page 96: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

Gide, Charles. Cofl:'~rt..'.s!}J~!:. ZiD2:.-'.~2..92erat5.v~'"~~2.:2Jeties. London: George G. Harrap and Co., 1930.

Qj nzbp.np: A<' h.Qr E".., ,.,,re:! ·Jr Ptte:r'-" f.!!"'m--· 1 ""'S . - .).. ... .:.>, ~, ;.-""· 4 .::_~~::..L. 0 ., ..J- .:.'.~ ·"-.:.:!....-:.-.:.~~ ... ~ ... :- ~

Philcsophia Judaica 5 Eastwest Library, Oxford: 19~ 6.

87

Glazr;r, Nathan z:1nd Moynihan, Daniel Patrick. ~e_yond tr'.i_t:_ Meltin~ Pot. Cambridge: MIT and Harvard University ·r;, .,.:-;-e-;;-;;-·-~·L. o r3~--... ~· u t-:l , .. ..I u c-

Gordo, Milton M. Assimilation in American Life. New Yor'k: Oxford University P1"ess, 19blf:---·

Grayzel, Solomon. ~'l_Jiist2£.Y of the .Jeii~-· Phi.ladelph:ta: Jewish Publication Society, 1947.

Greenberg, Louis. The Jews in Ru3s1~. New Haven: Yale University Press, Vol. 1, 1941t; Vol. 2, 1951.

Gutman, Herbert. "Wo:rk, Culture, and Snc:lety in Indus­triallsin~ f~merica, 1815-1919. !! The A:n1.~r.,ican Historlc2J. Rev:tew., Vol. 78, No. 3, June--1973~

Hallowt::.Y, iv1ark. Heaverw on Earth. London: Turns tile Press, 1951.

Handlins Osc&r. Adventure :tn Freedom. New York~ McGraw Hill, 1954.

Herh::ber-g, Arthur, ed. The Zionist Idea. New York: Mer:J.dlan:; 1960.

Resche1, JU.:irt,.ham Joshua. Israel. New Yor•k: Farrar, :3traus, a.:id. Giroux .. I96r;-

HJgham~ ,John. tT~:~1~st.~y ~

8tran~ers in the Land. New Brunswick, New Hi-!tger-s Uni.versity Press, 1955.

Hine, l\ol.H:.?rt V. t~111 0~\1 r1, c1n.d

Bosten: Little,

H1nes, Georp;~~ J.:1. 'dF:lr.:;t Newspapers of Southern Orec;on. ii . Q~::~r,on n:i.~~_?F_L~9:.J.. sc .. cj.etx_.:t~:.':E'..terlv_~ Vol. 24, Marci1 19~1 3.

Holtn:•oo}r~, S;;e\vrtrt H. ~~~ar:i~::.::?_2 of thG P.::ner:tc_!!Q. __ Dre~!!l· New York: Doubleday, 1957.

Page 97: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

Joseph 1 S;~mu.(;· 1 • Neu Yorlc:

Chicago: Univer-

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. Commitment and Community. Cambridg'.e: Harvard -University Press ;-·197"2.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. Communes. Nev York: Harper and Row, 1973.

Kennan, George. lfow York:

Laquo.r ~ Walter. Hinehar·t ·'

Lawsons Donna. New Yorlc

Lea.rs1, Hufus. 1954.

The Jews in Ameri0a. --------·------

Lockridge,. Kenneth A. Hundred Y~Brs. --"'·--·-~------· Company~ 1970.

2 Vollt

New Ycrlc Holt,

Cleveland; World,

88

Manu~l,. F:t•trn B. > ed, UtoE1.~~'. and Utonian Th<:iu;:vht. Dost,n1: Hour;hton Mifflin, 1966.

Meau' .l\.i£t.;,~.:;0.r•?t. "'l\"1wards rf.o:re Vi Yid Utopi&.S.. II Science.• 126, No ''ember 8, 195 7.

I:kmes: /lJJJ.."<lhcu:i. 11 The ft.m Oylam Movem(mt.." YIVO Annu8l of {g_'\_i~~·t~----~c~~-1 Science~ Vol. 4 > 1949.

Mu~nfor•d i Li::!l'li.s. T.1l?:_. St£rz _ _cf Utop:i.as. New York: Vli{~nt;, 1962.

MoE kowj:\; ~::: 1 Hem-y. 11 E>a.uJ. Kapla.n: An Easts ide Portrait." ~~.?~,.QutJ:.:oo_\:~, .January 16, 19ltl.

Nodel, Jnliug .;·. TliS:_.TieL:f3et·.-z~. Portland: Temple Beth If:Pa0l!. 1959.

Page 98: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

Noyes, Jorm Hurnphr·ey. !.!.?.:..story of' A~r·icar~_ Soc1.al:lsJ~:!L• New York: Reprint of 1870 edition, Hillary Ho~se, 1961.

Noyes, Pierrepont. My Father·' s Ho~se. New York: Fm'rar and Rinehart, 1937.

Qvf~~l-~!}d MonthlJ'.'.• Series 2, Vol. 6, December 1885.

Owen, Rob(~rt. The Book of the New .Moral World. Lendon: Effingham Wilson, 1830.

Owen~ Rob,2rt. rl'he L.1.fe 1)f Robert Owen. 2 Vols. New York: M. Kell :!y-;-1857.

Owen) R~bert. A New View of Socjety. London: Dent, 1927.

Pu.res, Berna:1."d. ~Jiistory of Russia. New York: Alfred K11opf, 1926.

Parker, Robert Allerton. A Yankee Saint. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1935.

F'et.t..'r·;.), Victor. All 7r·hini:~s Common. Minneapolis: Un.:1.ver­si ty of Minnesota Pre3s, 1SID5.

Podmore, Ii'r>a.nk. .Robert Owen. New York: Augustus P. Kelley, 1968.

Priee $ Gem·~e;e. "The Russian Jews in America." American Jewish Historical Society, Vol. XLVIII, No. l, S ~~pt. n:r~ibel-:' 1 9.-:;g - ..... . . _. , ~~' .,,... .

QuJnt ~ H(,ward. The For~in~ of Amevican Socialism. -·~ ... -~---- ·-·--------·---Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1953.

Ria:-'.)ano·J:;;ky, Nicholas. The Teachi,,!}.e_ of_Q_~_/:!r~ec Fou:rier. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969.

Rj_3 ch1n, Mo~;es. 'J:h_<::._Pr•g_P11sed _City_. Cambridge: Harper Torchbooks, 1970.

R•.ibert.:·; ., Ron E. The New Coxn,"nunes. Englewood Cliffs: P-:."' n t " r•"'"' P ·1_1_1_1 q ·71-·-·-"' J,., \-:;;-"' - .. -\;;.: ,.l.i: ' 1 ... . ,,

Page 99: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

Rogger, Hans. iu.r,1~u1 ist P;:;licy on Jewish EmJ.gration." Q_gy_ie~:....J-.::~~L!:E:2-..Af'f'.£ttrs, Vol. 3, No. l, 1973.

Sachar, Ab;~q11am !,eon. ;~ Eis to~' of the Jews. New York: ,:.-.,'"'p!" - ('li::::1:··, .1\dv . , .L ~"1 v ; •

Sc.1cl1~<..1.Tt, lfo\'IB .. r·d Mc Cleveland:

San:;J?.l, Maurice. Leve1 Sunli~. New York: Knopf~ 1953.

Scott" Lr~s l:te and Scott, Harvey. Histo~y:_gf ~-h~-~_9regon Slo 1.g_1_~EY· C~mbridge: Ri ver::!ide PY'0ss, J 924.

Seton-Watson, Oxford:

Hugh. The Russian Ernnire 1801-1917. Clarendon Press, 1967.

Shafer, Boyd c. Nationalism. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1955.

Sklare, Marshall, ed. The Jews. New York: The Free Press, 1958.

Sokol ow, Nahu~. H:tstory of Zion:tsm. 2 Vols. New York: Krl1AV Publ:tshing, 1969.

90

Spiro, Melford E. Kibbutz= Ventv,re j n Utopia. Cc>.mbridg;e: Ha:i:,vard University Press~·-195(;.

St1:;pniak. Underground Rw:>sia. New York: John W. Lovell, 1883.

Tyler 1 Alice Felt. Freedom's Ferment. '1'01,ebbooks, 1962.

Venturi, Franco. Roots cf Revolution. sal L:i.br•ary :, GroG.;;et and Dunlap,

New York:

New York: 1960.

Harper.•

Univer-

V~y3ey, Laurence. 1rhe Communal i::xoericnce. -·-·-·-... --------t------ New· York: E:.:2.~i;E:r Row~ 19 r( 3 •

Wa:Ll:t nr::, A. G. ~~ 1-I_lsj;_q_!~j' o_r_ Sou_~hern Orer;on. Portland: B:; the aut?·H)r, JJ)c;,.1.

WebbE:r, Ever::~tt. Es_Q_,02_t~~ Ut~.i~. Hew York: Hastings }~0 1.rne, 1959.

We .i zrnann} c:rn im. l '.)Lt 9.

'l1r.ta l and E:rro:r. New York: Harper,

Page 100: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

\~pl".•t <~·' ... f ,.,.,, ... ~ . -=:.:?_._:__::~.:_:.::~' Vol . ~i:.:_::~!~~~·)}~~.~:.re ,

W1;:;.c~:r:tt:zer:, ,] •2Wlsh

VoL

q _, ,

9 '

No • 2 ) February 1883.

No. 5 ' May 18B3.

Phil adelprda:

Yarrnolinsky, Avrahnm. A RuJsian 1 s AmericJn DreRm. -·----· ----~··· ~-----·- ..... ·--~-··-·-----:-~·-~,---L awr enc"-': Un:l:.rersit~,r of l:ansas Fre:s;:, 19t:5.

Zbore>'r:ski and. lle::. .. ::.·;)g. r..J.f't-J Is With Peonle. New York: . -·-.. -. _____ ... __ _. __ Ir.;,;8:r·natlonal. Universitie::> Press s 1952.

Article::;, of' Incorporation, Business Archives, Depa:r-tment or Commerce of the State of Oregon, Corporation Division, Salem, Oregon, New Odessa Community~ #330B.

Foreclosure Records, Douglas County Courthouse, Roseburg, Oregon.

Payroll Records, Gardiner Mill Employees, 1882, Douglas County Museum, Roseburg, Oregon.

Title Records, Douglas County Title Company, Roseburg, Ch .. egon.

MSS - Letter from Michael Heilprin to Oscar Straus~, November 30, 1883, Baron de Hirsch Collection, Amer:l..can Jewish Historical So,~iety, Waltham, Mass.

MSS - Letter to Michael Heilorin from members of New O ri 0 ~s~ ~l1~·1~t 1Q JA;)·1 t 11e re~h V~qen·i~e~~-~u,~us .... '"" s..J .,;J,. ' .re -..C:;J \.-~ ~,, -~ • ,t .. ..,.. 1.. , J 4 ..A (,.,.. " .f..,.. .;.. ..._, .1. ,_; ..... .:..:..., .~ ......... A.,

Barn8tein Colle~tion, YIVO Institute of Jewish Social Studies, New York.

MSS - Latte~ from Robert RoRenbluth to Geor~e B. Abd11J., August l~, 1965, Douelas County Museum, Roseburg, C:regon.

NSS - Letter from Theodore Swett Collection, June 16, 1942) Oregon Historical Society, Portland, Oregon.

Sether, Olger. Ccnversations in July of 1973, Glendale, Oret;,on.

01 ..,, ....

Swett, William, M. D. Telephone Conversation, March 1972.

Page 101: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

APPENDIX

Statistics from a letter to Michael Heilprin from

the Brothers and Sisters of New Odessa, August 10, 1884.

Th:ts letter is :i.ncluded in the Leah Eisenberg-Julius

Barnstein Collection, YIVO Institute of Social Sciences,

New Yorlc.

Page 102: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

'" ... ..

.. ' -·~-.

!ii

~7

~o

Itg I l

t ~i

2?.

5t3 ~o

b WeJJ0: i

~'2.. '

21/

~r ! c.i..t I ~~

lt . ' I

~l

.•. , - ·"·--.... --- -·------··-....-- ... _ -- _ _.._. '~- - .

93 - ........ _ .. __ ._.,, . .....,,,

,• \

'I 'I I l \. t ?

. '

Page 103: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

...

·'

J I

~ ~ l/. IG I ., 9o

I 09. ,i~. ;gr_

}L/f

JOO /S--0.

Pll?>. 3J

. 94

Page 104: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

.. ,

'I

--- . --- ,, ,. .......... -- ---~-'---

C) . ';!,Mto.

~'"!>

. JQ)).

~ ~6~

¥S-o. JIO'

~~o

2~o .'IS-So It 19...

-- J S-o

3f

-~---·,.,.-----·

. 95

}

\'

Page 105: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

..

l"*) i /b'37. So.

ii 30. 07.

1117. /0 : ll/7. 7s- \ So.·

So 70 ;g s-o

__ v 3 l/7. Sf

/r>fJ. 1ro ~r

100

---------·--==::::::--------~ &~·1J ~ .w~ ~

96

) ';

Page 106: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

..

'· '

.... ···- .... --····------~-------·-·------ . _ _J __

-- -·· --· -~ . -- ~o - Jo

97

Page 107: New Odessa, 1882-1887: United we stand, divided we fall

- '

.... ·" · · .:. - \ · .. vi 9uv~'Uj ,,..

· : ' . · . · 1.fk f~ 1 t,{/W- 0~!- (~~.n,~

98

---·..---- ,....-.---~~ _,,.-

_./"'

f e.ows #Q00 ~. ~ J t.cri,,~ ---- L/ to j ~ -% ox~~ Go 8 ~ i 'r~ w.l&. JS'

CJ way1vJ · 1S'o

~~1 ~ rr ~ ~s So

i cd,{,: t rvT;u .

2 lwihiV.S /9..

1.oo .

QSo

'· J2S"'

. ' -------~-----.-·-..... -------·---...,------.------·-